Shahpura Street Vendor Campion School … vs Municipal Corporation on 16 March, 2026

    0
    42
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Madhya Pradesh High Court

    Shahpura Street Vendor Campion School … vs Municipal Corporation on 16 March, 2026

    Author: Vivek Rusia

    Bench: Vivek Rusia

             NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:24132
    
    
    
    
                                                                    1                                   WP-5378-2023
                                   IN       THE    HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                         AT JABALPUR
                                                              BEFORE
                                                 HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
                                                                 &
                                               HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRADEEP MITTAL
                                                       ON THE 16 th OF MARCH, 2026
                                                      WRIT PETITION No. 5378 of 2023
                              SHAHPURA STREET VENDOR CAMPION SCHOOL ROAD SAMITI AND
                                                     OTHERS
                                                      Versus
                                    BHOPAL MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND OTHERS
                             Appearance:
                                   Shri Gaurav Maheshwari and Shri Shivansh Soni - Advocates for the
                             petitioners.
                                   Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal - Senior Advocate with Shri Yashovardhan Jain -
                             Advocate for the respondent No.1.
                                   Shri Ritwik Parashar - Govt. Advocate for the respondent No.2/State.
                                                                        WITH
                                              CONTEMPT PETITION CIVIL No. 3968 of 2024
                                 SHAHPURA STREET VENDOR CAMPION SCHOOL ROAD SAMITI
                                                       Versus
                                              MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
                             Appearance:
                                Shri Gaurav Maheshwari with Shri Shivansh Soni - Advocate for the petitioner.
                                Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal - Senior Advocate with Shri Yashovardhan Jain - Advocate for
                             the respondent No.1.
    
                                                                      ORDER
    

    Per: Justice Vivek Rusia
    The writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking following reliefs:-

    (i) Declare the action of the respondent No.1 of demolishing the |stalls
    of petitioner vendors, and evicting the petitioners from their place of

    Signature Not Verified
    Signed by: SHRUTI JHA
    Signing time: 26-03-
    2026 17:56:39
    NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:24132

    2 WP-5378-2023
    business as illegal, arbitrary, violative of fundamental rights, violative
    of provisions of the Act of 2014,the Scheme of 2020, etc. and further be
    pleased to declare the same as null and void; and

    SPONSORED

    (ii) To issue a writ of mandamus or prohibition or in the nature of
    mandamus or prohibition or any other appropriate writ, order or
    direction, restraining the Respondents from creating any hurdles,
    obstruction, objections etc. through its employees, –agents, officers
    etc. for the petitioners to carry out and run their business; and

    (iii) To issue a writ of prohibition, or in the nature of prohibition, or any
    other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents not
    to evict, restrain, confiscate the vendors and their belongings, from the
    place of their business without following the due procedure law and
    process under the provisions of the Street Vendors (Protection of
    Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014
    and the
    Madhya .Pradesh Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and
    Regulation of Street Vending) Scheme, 2020; and

    (iv) To issue the writ of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order
    or direction, directing the respondents to produce relevant documents
    related to development of Shed/shops for vendors in the concerned
    street of Shahpura; and

    (v) Any other relief or reliefs that this Hon. Court deems fit and proper
    in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be kindly passed.

    2. The contempt petition (civil) has been filed by the petitioner for non-
    compliance of order dated 29.03.2023 passed by this Court in W.P. No.5378/2024.

    3. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the
    Constitution of India by the petitioners’ association, namely Shahpura Street
    Vendor Campion School Road Samiti, comprising of small street vendors carrying
    at business at Shahpura Street, Campion School Road, Bhopal.

    Facts of the case, in short, are as under:-

    Signature Not Verified
    Signed by: SHRUTI JHA
    Signing time: 26-03-
    2026 17:56:39

    NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:24132

    3 WP-5378-2023

    4. The members of the petitioners’ association have been running their
    respective food stalls and small businesses at the concerned site for a long period,
    in most of cases for more than 15 years. The members of petitioners have been
    duly recognized by the respondent authorities and have been issued valid vendor
    certificates. The vendors have also been regularly paying rent to the
    respondents/authorities, possessing electricity connections in their names, and
    have also obtained requisite licenses and certificates, including those under the
    Food Safety laws and the Shops & Establishments Act.

    5. The respondent No.1/Bhopal Municipal Corporation had itself undertaken
    development of the said area as a “food street”. In the year 2016, funds were
    allocated for construction of sheds and by 2017 shops/stalls were constructed and
    allotted to the vendors, who thereafter continued their business therefrom in
    accordance with law. On 22.02.2023, the respondent No.1/Bhopal Municipal
    Corporation carried out a demolition drive at the said site and demolished several
    stalls of the petitioners’ vendors. The vendors were also directed to vacate the
    premises. The demolition drive was allegedly undertaken under the pretext of
    removal of encroachments, despite the petitioners were authorized vendors.

    Aggrieved by the action of the respondents, and in absence of any efficacious
    alternative remedy, the petitioners have approached this Court in the instant
    petition seeking appropriate reliefs.

    6. It is pertinent to note that due to non-compliance of the interim order
    dated 29.03.2024 passed by this Court in instant petition, the petitioners have filed
    CONC No.3968/2024 (Shahpura Street Vendor Campion School Road Samiti Vs
    Municipal Corporation
    ), which is tagged alongwith this writ petition.

    Submissions on behalf of the petitioners:

    7. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the impugned action of

    Signature Not Verified
    Signed by: SHRUTI JHA
    Signing time: 26-03-
    2026 17:56:39
    NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:24132

    4 WP-5378-2023
    the respondents/authorities is wholly arbitrary, illegal and violative of the
    fundamental rights of the petitioner vendors. It is submitted that the members of
    the petitioners’ association are duly authorized street vendors, holding valid
    vendor certificates issued by the respondents/authorities themselves. The vendors
    have been carrying on their respective businesses at the concerned site for last
    several years in accordance with law, after complying with all statutory
    requirements, including payment of due rent, electricity charges and obtaining
    necessary licenses.

    8. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the
    respondent/Municipal Corporation had itself developed the area as a designated
    food street and allotted spaces to the petitioner vendors after constructing sheds.
    Therefore, the respondents are now estopped from treating the petitioners as
    unauthorized encroachers and evicting them in such a high-handed manner. It is
    contended that the demolition action dated 22.02.2023 has been undertaken
    without issuance of any prior notice and without affording any opportunity of
    hearing to the petitioners, which is in gross violation of the principles of natural
    justice.

    9. It is further submitted by learned counsel that the impugned action is in
    clear contravention of the provisions of the Street Vendors (Protection of
    Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014
    (in short it shall be
    referred to as “Act of 2014”), particularly of Section 18, which mandates issuance
    of notice and compliance with due procedure before eviction or relocation of the
    street vendors. The respondents have failed to follow the statutory safeguards
    provided under the Act. Learned counsel also submits that under the Madhya
    Pradesh Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street
    Vending) Scheme, 2020, the authorities are obligated to ensure relocation and

    Signature Not Verified
    Signed by: SHRUTI JHA
    Signing time: 26-03-
    2026 17:56:39
    NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:24132

    5 WP-5378-2023

    rehabilitation of vendors prior to eviction. However, no such steps have been taken
    by the respondents in the present case.

    10. It is also argued that the arbitrary demolition and eviction have resulted
    in deprivation of the petitioners’ right to livelihood, which forms an integral part of
    the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Further, the
    petitioners’ fundamental right to carry on trade or business under Article 19(1)(g)
    of the Constitution of India has also been infringed without any reasonable
    restriction in accordance with law. He submits that unless the respondents are
    restrained from taking further coercive action, the petitioners will suffer
    irreparable loss and injury, as the said business is their sole source of livelihood. It
    is lastly submitted that the impugned action as illegal hence, appropriate interim
    protection to the petitioners vendors may be granted.

    Submissions on behalf of the respondents:-

    11. Learned Senior counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the
    present writ petition is misconceived & devoid of merit, and it is liable to be
    dismissed. It is submitted that the action undertaken by the respondent
    No.1/Municipal Corporation on 22.02.2023 was in accordance with law and in
    discharge of its statutory duties to remove the unauthorized encroachments from
    public land and to ensure proper regulation of public spaces. Learned counsel
    contends that the petitioners do not have any indefeasible or vested right to occupy
    the public street in question. Mere issuance of vendor certificates or temporary
    permissions does not confer any permanent right on the petitioners to continue at a
    particular location, especially when such occupation obstructs public use or
    violates planning and regulatory norms.

    12. It is further submitted by the respondents that the respondents/authorities

    Signature Not Verified
    Signed by: SHRUTI JHA
    Signing time: 26-03-
    2026 17:56:39
    NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:24132

    6 WP-5378-2023
    are empowered under the relevant municipal laws, as well as the provisions
    governing street vending, to regulate, relocate, and, if necessary, remove vendors
    in the larger public interest, including maintenance of traffic flow, public safety,
    and urban planning requirements. Learned counsel submits that the action was
    taken as part of a broader drive against encroachments and unauthorized structures,
    and the same cannot be termed as arbitrary. The petitioners have been treated in
    accordance with applicable rules and policies. It is also contended that the
    provisions of the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street
    Vending) Act, 2014
    and the relevant Scheme do not create an absolute bar against
    eviction, but only regulate the procedure. The respondents submit that the
    necessary steps, in accordance with law, have been undertaken.

    13. Without prejudice, it is also submitted by learned Senior counsel for the
    respondents that in cases where relocation is feasible, the Competent Authority
    may consider the case of eligible vendors in accordance with the applicable policy
    and availability of space. However, the petitioners cannot insist on carrying on
    business at the same location as a matter of right. Learned counsel further submits
    that no fundamental right of the petitioners has been violated, as the right under
    Article 19(1)(g) is subject to reasonable restrictions, and the impugned action falls
    within the ambit of such permissible restrictions. It is lastly submitted by him that
    no case for grant of interim relief is made out, as the balance of convenience lies in
    favour of the respondents and public at large. Grant of any interim protection
    would adversely affect the public interest, and writ petition deserves to be
    dismissed.

    14. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record.

    15. Vide order dated 27.06.2023, this Court passed a detailed order by
    directing respondents to file an affidavit of the Principal Secretary, Urban

    Signature Not Verified
    Signed by: SHRUTI JHA
    Signing time: 26-03-
    2026 17:56:39
    NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:24132

    7 WP-5378-2023
    Administration and Development, to explain as to why the Committee has not
    been constituted to consider the grievance of the Street Vendors. An affidavit in
    the form of compliance report has been filed, according to which the Town
    Vending Committee has been constituted vide order dated 01.03.2012 within the
    jurisdiction of Municipal Corporation, Bhopal.

    16. Under the Act of 2014, enacted by the Parliament for the welfare of the
    Street Vendors, there is a provision under Section 22 for the establishment of the
    Town Vending Committee by the Commissioner, Nagar Palik, Bhopal. In the
    present case, vide order dated 01.03.2012, a Committee was constituted headed by
    the Commissioner Nagar Nigam, Bhopal, comprising 7 members, including the
    representative of Street Vendors. The State Government has also framed the Rules
    called Madhya Pradesh Street Vendors (Protection of livelihood and Regulation of
    Street Vending) Rules, 2017, which have been and published in the Gazette
    Notification dated 24.04.2017. These Rules prescribe the complete mechanism for
    the constitution of a Committee and the redressal of the grievance.

    17. The Commissioner, Nagar Nigam, Bhopal, now, vide order dated
    07.02.2018, has reconstituted a Committee. The said order is reproduced as
    under:-

    vkns’k
    i= Øekad 420
    Hkksiky fnukad 07@02@18
    iFk fodzsrk ¼thfodk dk laj{k.k vkSj iFk ij foØ; dk fofu;eu vf/kfu;e&2014^^½ ds varxZr
    ,oa e/;izns’k jkT;i= fnukad 24 viSzy 2017 ds ifjikyu esa iFk ij foØ; djus okyksa dh dk;Z
    ;kstuk ds fØ;kUo;u ,oa vUrfoZHkkxh; leUo;u lqfuf’pr djus gsrq uxj foØ; lfefr dk iquxZBu
    fd;k tkrk gS] ftlesa fuEukuqlkj lnL; gksaxs %&
    1- vk;qDr uxj fuxe] Hkksiky v/;{k
    2- vk;qDr }kjk ukefufnZ”V nks lykgdkj lnL;

    3- uxj ifj;kstuk vf/kdkjh@,u-;w-,y-,e- izHkkjh ¼vk;qDr }kjk ukefufnZ”V lnL;

    Signature Not Verified
    Signed by: SHRUTI JHA
    Signing time: 26-03-
    2026 17:56:39
              NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:24132
    
    
    
    
                              3-                                      8 izHkkjh ¼vk;qDr }kjk ukefufnZ"V
                                    uxj ifj;kstuk vf/kdkjh@,u-;w-,y-,e-                                 WP-5378-2023
                                                                                                           lnL;
                                    vf/kdkjh½                                                              lfpo
                              4-    LokLF; vf/kdkjh ¼vk;qDr }kjk ukefufnZ"V vf/kdkjh½                      lnL;
                              5-    uxj iqfyl v/kh{kd@mi iqfyl v/kh{kd ¼gchcxat@Vh-Vh-                     lnL;
    

    uxj@xksfoUniqjk@tgkaxhjkckn@dksrokyh@’kkgtgkaukckn@guqekuxat@,e-ih-

                                    uxj@feljksn@fu'kkriqjk@xkSre uxj@cSjkx<+½
                              6-    vfrfjDr iqfyl v/kh{kd@izfrfuf/k                                        lnL;
                              7-    O;kikjh la?k ds izfrfuf/k                                              lnL;
                              8-    la;qDr lapkyd@;kstuk izkf/kdkjh ¼xzke ,oa uxj fuos'k ds izfrfuf/k½     lnL;
                              9-    iFk fodzsrkvksa ds izfrfuf/k ¼10½                                      lnL;
                              10-   fuoklh dY;k.k lfefr ¼vk;qDr }kjk ukefufnZ"V ,d lnL;½                   lnL;
                              11-   xSj ljdkjh laxBu ¼vk;qDr }kjk ukefufnZ"V ,d lnL;½                      lnL;
                              12-   ftyk vxz.kh izca/kd                                                    lnL;
                              13-   uxj foØ; lfefr v/;{k ¼vk;qDr½ }kjk euksuhr fo'ks"kK@fdlh               fo'ks"k
                                    O;fDr@laxBu@la?k@dEiuh dks mldh lykg@lgk;rk izkIr djus ds fy,          lnL;
                                    fo'ks"k lnL;A
    

    mDr uxj foØ; lfefr dk xBu fd;k tkrk gS tks iFk ij foØ; djus okyksa dh dk;Z ;kstukvksa
    ,oa lHkh ;kstukvksa ds fØ;kUo;u ds fy, mRrjnk;h gksxh] tks le;&lhek ds varxZr dk;Z djuk
    lqfuf’pr djsaxsA
    ¼fiz;adk nkl½
    vkbZ-,-,l-

    vk;qDr
    uxj fuxe] Hkksiky

    18. Therefore, in view of the above, this petition is disposed of with liberty
    to the members of the petitioners’ association to submit an objection/grievance
    before the aforesaid Committee under the Act, 2014 and Rules, 2017, and the said
    Committee shall consider the grievance in accordance with law and shall pass a
    speaking order. Till then, any interim protection granted in favour of the petitioner
    by this court shall continue.

    19. The writ petition stands disposed of.

    20. In view of the above, contempt petition (civil) also stands disposed of.

                                      (VIVEK RUSIA)                                      (PRADEEP MITTAL)
                                          JUDGE                                               JUDGE
    
    Signature Not Verified
    Signed by: SHRUTI JHA
    Signing time: 26-03-
    2026 17:56:39
              NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:24132
    
    
    
    
                                                        9   WP-5378-2023
                             Shruti
    
    
    
    
    Signature Not Verified
    Signed by: SHRUTI JHA
    Signing time: 26-03-
    2026 17:56:39
    



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here