School of LAW Name of the faculty member: Neha Gadgala

Course Code: LAW334 Course Title: SEMINAR

Academic Task No: 1 Academic Task Title: ASSIGNMENT
Date of Allotment: 01/02/2022 Date of Submission: 20/02/2022
Student Roll No: A03 Student Reg. No: 11909090
Term: 6 Section: 1903
Max. Marks: 30 Marks Obtained:

Learning Outcomes: (Student to write briefly about learning obtained from the academic
tasks) Learnt various fundamental rights that the prisoners have got during the time of
Covid-19.

Declaration:
I declare that this Assignment is my individual work. I have not copied it from any other students’
work or from any other source except where due acknowledgement is made explicitly in the text,
nor has any part been written for me by any other person.

Evaluation Criterion: Rubrics on different parameters

Student’ Signature:

Evaluator’s Comments (For Instructor’s use only):

General Observations Suggestions for Improvement Best part of assignment

Evaluator’s Signature and Date

 Rights and Obligation of Street vendors

Introduction

Street vendors’ rights to carry on their trade in public spaces, has been the subject matter of
debate and discussion in India for a very long time. In fact it has taken numerous judgments of
the Supreme Court and High Court to recognise their rights and shape up a statutory regime.
Despite this, the sight of street vendors being harassed at the hands of municipal authorities or
police officials remains a common occurrence. The street vendors are made to cough up
considerable sums of money, monthly or even weekly, so that they may be allowed to use these
public places for the purpose of earning a livelihood. However, it must be borne in mind that
these bribes do not guarantee any protection from civic authorities taking action against them.
The purported action may include eviction of the vendor, imposition of fines, confiscation of
the saleable goods or confiscation of their equipment like weights and measures.

Street vendors form a very important segment of an unorganized sector in the country. It is
estimated that in several cities’ street vendors counts for more than 2% of the population of
that city. Women constitute a large segment of the street vendors in almost every city.
According to a survey Uttar Pradesh tops in the number of street vendors by having a total of
7.8 lakh, it was followed by West Bengal with 5.5 lakh street vendors.

The Government of India has categorised vending under the three heads. They are:

• Stationery vendors are those vendors who carry out vending activity on a regular basis
at a specific location, with explicit or implicit consent of the civic or local authorities.
Usually, they carry their business in a vehicle or an establishment that is not
permanently attached to the real property (may be in a public or private owned property
but not on public street and sidewalks)
• Peripatetic vendors are those categories of vendors who carry out vending through
foot which is by way of carrying baskets on their shoulders, etc.
• mobile vendors move from place to place vending their goods and services on bicycles
or motorized vehicles.
Provisions under bare

Rights of street vendors:

Every street vendor shall have the right to carry on the business of street vending activities in
accordance with the terms and conditions mentioned in the certificate of vending and where
any area or space, as the case may be, has been earmarked as no-vending zone, no street vendor
shall carry out any vending activities in that zone.

Right of street vendor for a new site or area on relocation:

Every street vendor, who possesses a certificate of vending, shall, in case of his relocation
under section 18, be entitled for new site or area, as the case may be, for carrying out his
vending activities as may be determined by the local authority, in consultation with the Town
Vending Committee.

Duty of street vendors:

Where a street vendor occupies space on a time sharing basis, he shall remove his goods and
wares every day at the end of the time-sharing period allowed to him.

Maintenance of cleanliness and public hygiene:

Every street vendor shall maintain cleanliness and public hygiene in the vending zones and the
adjoining areas.

Maintenance of civic amenities in vending zone in good condition:

Every street vendor shall maintain civic amenities and public property in the vending zone in
good condition and not damage or destroy or cause any damage or destruction to the same.

Payment of maintenance charges:

Every street vendor shall pay such periodic maintenance charges for the civic amenities and
facilities provided in the vending zones as may be determined by the local authority.
Licensing:

The idea of licensing came up to prevent illegitimate business which run in the name of street
vending. It also aims at protection of hawkers from the harassment of police and other
influential persons. It would serve the purpose of identification of vendors in the area so as to
maintain the space management and it also helps in registration.

Licensing also makes the vending business of a person legal and the authorities can keep record
of the business of each vendors. Census can be made easier when the records are correct. The
idea of licensing pop up from the National Policy on Urban Street Vendors and it made the
problems to be tackled easily such as allocation of space in pavement for trading, legitimate
tax collection on monthly basis, etc. No hawking license shall be issued in non-vending areas.
The license will be only issued after the survey and registration fees will be notified by the
authority.

Street vendors act was enacted in 2014 but till now only preliminary effort has been done in
actual implementation of this act like framing rules or conducting survey etc. Most of the issued
are left to the Scheme that is to be framed by the local authorities beginning with the manner
of registration to the entire thing. The railway accommodates a significant population of street
vendors in India but unfortunately railway is excluded from purview of this act. The standing
committee has also recommended that railway should be included under purview of this act.

The undertaking given by person that no other means of livelihood is controversial because
suppose any person employed as watchman can look for part time employment as a street
vendor. So clause shall be subjected to things such as of person, estimated from applying
vending business etc. The obligations such as fee for certification, maintenance charges, to
maintain public property/hygienic conditions etc. can be cause of breach of conditions by a
street vendor because average daily income of street vendors is around Rs 70 as per survey and
lead to harassment of vendors by officials. So, ultimately defeat the purpose of enactment of
this act. The strict licensing regime under the act may result in a rise in corrupt practices of the
enforcement agencies. A long arduous process is setup to get hold of a certificate of vending.
The standards for applicability of registration, scrutiny of claims burden of registration on the
vendor, the inability of street vendors to produce necessary documents due to poor living
conditions etc., all act as a hindrance for the street vendor to get hold of a license.

Legal Provisions under Constitution

Preamble of Indian Constitution states that India shall secure to its citizens justice, social,
economic and political and equality of status and of opportunity. Article 14 of the Constitution
deals with equality before law. Even the vendors got right just like any other persons and they
will be protected by the law of the country without any discrimination.

Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution guarantees to every citizen the right to practice any
profession or to carry on any occupation, trade or business. Likewise, hawkers have the
fundamental right to carry on trade or business of their choice. But it is subjected to reasonable
restriction imposable under Article 19(6) of Indian Constitution. The court must balance
freedom of trade under Article 19(1)(g) and freedom of inter-State trade and commerce under
Article 301 against the national interest. It is within the domain of the State to make any law
imposing reasonable restrictions in the interest of general public on such right." The court also
observed that proper regulation is essential condition as otherwise the very object of laying out
roads to facilitate traffic may be defeated.

Case laws

PyareLal vs. NDMC [AIR 1968 SC133]

In one of the earliest cases which concerned the rights of street vendors a three judge bench of
the Supreme Court held that no person carrying on the business of cooked food on public streets
has any fundamental right to carry on street vending, particularly, in a manner which creates
unsanitary and unhygienic conditions in the neighbourhood.

The condition that the vendors’ activities should not cause unsanitary conditions is acceptable
but the decision of the Court failed to recognize any right, whatsoever, of the street vendors.
This reflects that the judicial opinion leaned in favour of the municipal bodies exercising their
coercive powers to evict and control the vendors, while giving more weight to the people’s
right to free movement on streets. This approach failed to recognize the pressing needs of
thousands of small vendors who depend solely on these public places to earn a living.

MCD vs. Gurnam Kaur [1989(1)SCC101]

In the said case, question revolved around eviction of a temporary stall built near the gate of a
hospital. The same was alleged to be causing inconvenience and therefore sought to be
removed. Among the several issues that came up, the court also looked into whether there was
any statutory duty cast upon the municipal body to provide an alternative to a street vendor
who is being evicted.

Though the court recognized the plight of the street vendors it still followed a strict approach
towards carrying out a cleanliness drive on the streets and evicting encroachers. The welfare
or the rights of the street vendors seemed to be of lesser importance to the court.

Bombay Hawkers Union v. Bombay Municipal Corporation & Others [1985(3)SCC 528]

The Supreme Court for the first time retained street vendors' right to a living and went on to
rule that unreasonable restrictions and conditions cannot be imposed on street vendors.

In this case the matter pertained to hawkers and vendors carrying on their occupation in various
parts of Bombay. The municipal authority sought to evict them on the basis that they caused
nuisance and inconvenience to passers-by. The Supreme Court while taking a stand different
from the one in Pyarelal, recognized the right of vendors under article 19(1) (g) of the
Constitution and applied the accompanying concept of reasonable restrictions under article
19(6). In what seems to be a shift of trend in the court’s opinion, the court undertook a detailed
enquiry into the actions of the authority and tested them on the yardstick of being reasonable
or not. The following extract from the judgment is relevant for the purpose of highlighting the
court’s concern and shift of trend.

In Gainda Ram v. MCD , the Supreme Court stated that the fundamental right of hawkers
cannot be kept in the dark simply because they are poor and unorganized, nor can it be
completely decided by the varying standards of a scheme that changes from time to time under
the Court's orders.
Further, in the case of Sodan Singh v. New Delhi Municipal Corporation , the Supreme Court
recognized the right of street vendors to practice their business. The court ruled that, with
proper regulation, vendors can be a boon to society by providing items of daily use at a lower
cost.

Way forward

The Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014 was
brought in order to recognise the rights of the vendors who are part of the informal economy.
The act legalised the vending work done by the street and the mobile vendors and provided the
manners in which the vending shall be done by the vendors and hawkers. However, the
government’s intention of implementing the act didn’t work on the practical level as the
situation of multiple arbitrary evictions across the country reflects it. The Government needs
to implement the act on the ground level so that the rights of the vendors can be protected as
provided by the Constitution under Article 19. However there are some flawed provisions in
street vendor’s act 2014 but still it is a very good start for creating a harassment free
environment for street vendors.

Upon a perusal of various judgments, the National Policy and the recent Act, it can be safely
said that little regard is given to street vendors’ property rights in their goods (both saleable
items and items which are their tools to carry out the trade). This is in view of the fact that there
has been little discussion on the said issue, and protection, if any, has been provided only in
the form of providing notice to the vendor and the imposition of fine and resorting to
confiscation as a last resort. There are no provisions which make non-observance of the notice
and imposition of fine as a pre-condition of confiscation of goods as punishable under law.
Therefore, enforcement will be a problem in the longer run.

ii. Street vending has not been included in urban planning, which seems to be a huge drawback
for the street vending activity. Though National Policies envisaged the inclusion of street
vending in the master plan; the same is yet to be incorporated by the authorities responsible.
Though the Act, various judgments of Supreme Court and High Courts and the National
Policies formulated sought to provide protection to vendors from harassment, the same have
not been implemented due to lack of sensitivity in the officials.

The Act in particular and the overall legal position in general does not provide for the vendors
to transfer their right to vend either permanently or temporarily. An essential element of the
right to property is the ability to transfer or dispose property in a manner the owner/holder
would like. Therefore, this restriction on the ability to transfer their vending right greatly
hampers their property right.