Right To Street Vending vs Rights Of General Public: Delhi High Court Questions Centre Over A Balanced Approach

The Delhi High Court on Friday questioned the Central Government as to whether the right of street vending impinges on the fundamental rights of general public when implemented on the ground.

A bench of Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Jasmeet Singh, which was hearing a batch of pleas challenging the vires of Street Vendors Act, 2014 and the 2019 scheme framed thereunder, orally remarked thus:

"Whenever the Supreme Court has said that there is fundamental right to vending, the spirit has been that every fundamental right comes with a limitation or restriction. The point is, where have you put the scale? Where are you putting the fulcrum? Have you balanced?"

"Are they (right to vending) so structured, that when implemented on the ground, is it resulting in the fundamental rights violation of not only the petitioners but also the general public? They go to the market. Is it impinging on their rights under Art. 14, 19 and 21?"

While reiterating that there is no denying the fact that there is a fundamental right to vending, the Court however added that it was adjudicating on the aspect of the regulation, structure and implementation of the Street Vendors Act.

"We are not saying they do not have a right. We have said we don't grudge that people are selling small things, vegetables, fruits etc. They (street vendors) are a necessity in the society. Not that they do this only for their livelihood, we also go and buy from them. There is a large segment of the society which depends on them for clothes etc. we are not saying that they are not serving the purpose, we are only on the extent of kind of regulation, structure and how it is going to play out," the Court told Centre.

On the other hand, Advocate Kirtiman Singh appearing for the Centre vehemently opposed the petitions by arguing that the Street Vendors Act is a welfare legislation and that Centre is fully competent to make the said legislation under Entries 20, 22, 23 and 24 of List 3 under Schedule VII of the Constitution.

Responding to the question put forth by the bench as to whether the authority which is implementing the Act on the ground is doing so in a way that it is leading to its abuse, Singh said:

 "The law is clear. Abuse is not the ground to strike down a provision. Whether the mechanism is in place is justifiable in terms of my (Centre's) competence of making a law."

The matter will now be heard on January 17.

Earlier, the Court had ordered the Delhi government to produce the relevant records pertaining to constitution of all Town Vending Committees in the national capital under the Street Vendors Act, 2014, and explain as to how the various members are being nominated therein.

Previously the Court heard Senior Advocate Sanjeev Ralli appearing for the petitioners who submitted that the Delhi Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Scheme of 2019 makes no reference to any of the clause or chapter of the master plan or zonal plan of any area, as if there was no law on the regulation of street vending.

In one of the hearings, the bench had expressed its displeasure over the fact that there are no experts in the Town Vending Committee and that it would like to hear the challenge so as to ascertain the flaws and the fallacies in the implementation process.

It had also rapped the Delhi Government over the implementation of the Act, stating, "No more of politics, populism…Please get down to some real work."

Case Title: New Delhi Traders Association v. GNCTD