Section 20. Redressal of grievances or resolution of disputes of street vendors
(1) The appropriate Government may constitute one or more committees consisting of a Chairperson who has been a civil judge or a judicial magistrate and two other professional shaving such experience as may be prescribed for the purpose of deciding the applications received under sub-section (2):
Provided that no employee of the appropriate Government or the local authority shall be appointed as members of the committee.
(2) Every street vendor who has a grievance or dispute may make an application in writing to the committee constituted under sub-section (1) in such form and manner as maybe prescribed.
(3) On receipt of grievance or dispute under sub-section (2), the committee referred to in sub-section (1) shall, after verification and enquiry in such manner, as may be prescribed, take steps for redressal of such grievance or resolution of such dispute, within such time and in such manner as may be prescribed.
(4) Any person who is aggrieved by the decision of the committee may prefer an appeal to the local authority in such form, within such time and in such manner as may be prescribed.
(5) The local authority shall dispose of the appeal received under sub-section (4) within such time and in such manner as may be prescribed:
Provided that the local authority shall, before disposing of the appeal, give an opportunity of being heard to the aggrieved person.
How courts have applied section 20
- Courts have repeatedly ordered the constitution of Grievance Redressal Committees under Section 20, with retired Civil Judges or Judicial Magistrates as chairpersons, and with staff and office space.1,2,3,4,5
- The absence of the Section 20(4) appellate authority opens direct recourse to writ jurisdiction but does not confer any entitlement on the petitioner.6
- Where a Section 20 appeal remedy is duly constituted, courts may dismiss writ petitions on the ground of an efficacious alternative remedy.7
- Certificate-holding vendors are generally protected from interference pending decisions, subject to compliance with their Certificate of Vending terms.8,9,10,11
- Pending the scheme's notification under Section 38, courts directed strict adherence to Section 19 procedures for seized goods.1,2,3
- A chairman's appointment under the Act and Rules is not governed by a general government resolution capping contractual engagement, and tenure is fixed by the Rules.12
Read the full overviewShow less· 3 paragraphs
The judgements here are mostly about the constitution and functioning of Grievance Redressal Committees under Section 20 of the 2014 Act, and about the interim protection courts grant to street vendors while such bodies are being set up. Several orders from the Bombay High Court directed the State Government to notify the Street Vendors Scheme and to ensure Grievance Redressal Committees are constituted, chaired by retired Civil Judges or Judicial Magistrates, with staff and office space provided. Similar directions appear from other courts: the Karnataka High Court accepted a memo constituting a committee and gave vendors liberty to file grievances before it, and the Punjab and Haryana High Court took on record a notification constituting a Dispute Redressal Committee under Section 20. Where committees were constituted, courts examined their functioning, including the tenure of a chairman appointed under State Rules and whether a government resolution capping post-retiral engagement applied; the Jharkhand High Court held it did not, as the appointment flowed from the Act and the Rules.1,2,3,4,5,12
Where the Section 20(4) appellate authority (the local authority) was not constituted, at least one court held that this only opened direct recourse to writ jurisdiction and did not confer any entitlement on a petitioner. By contrast, where an appellate authority under the Rules was duly constituted, the same High Court dismissed a petition in the presence of that efficacious alternative remedy. Courts also did not decide broader questions about the Act where interim protection sufficed: several Delhi High Court orders directed that certificate-holding vendors not be interfered with, subject to compliance with the terms and conditions of their Certificates of Vending, leaving issues like fixed-site allocation to post-survey vending planning by Town Vending Committees. Pending the scheme's notification, courts directed strict adherence to Section 19 procedures for seized goods.6,7,8,9,10,11,1,2,3
Some judgements dealt with related issues rather than Section 20 itself. The Delhi High Court dismissed a legal-heir substitution claim, holding that under Section 5(2) of the Act, only the spouse or a dependent child of a deceased certificate-holder may vend in the holder's place, a son who is not a dependant being impermissible. Another Delhi order reiterated that removal of encroachments from public property is primarily the municipal corporation's duty, with police assistance where sought, and that vendors may vend strictly within their certificate terms. A Telangana order noted the Act's scheme of survey by the Town Vending Committee, accommodation in vending zones, and a bar on eviction pending survey, in a challenge to dispossession.13,14,15
By court
Outcomes
Judgements applying section 20
Palima Rajendra Kondar Tata Nagar Zopadpatti and Ors. Vs Deputy Commissioner and Ors.
Outcome: DisposedThe Bombay High Court directed the State Government of Maharashtra to finalize and notify the Street Vendors Scheme under Section 38 of the 2014 Act. The Court further ordered the constitution of Grievance Redressal Committees with retired judges or magistrates as chairmen, provided necessary infrastructure, and…
DisposedOpenThe Court directed the Maharashtra Government to complete the constitution of Grievance Redressal Committees under Section 20 of the Street Vendors Act, 2014, by resolving staffing issues for Chairmen, and to notify the Draft Street Vendors Scheme after allowing two months for objections.
DisposedOpenMaharashtra Hawkers Federation Vs State of Maharashtra Thr. Principal Secretary and Anr.
Outcome: DisposedThe High Court adjudicated writ petitions concerning the delayed formulation of the Street Vendors Scheme in Maharashtra. The Court directed the State to constitute Dispute Redressal Committees with proper judicial chairmanship and provided infrastructure.
DisposedOpenChandigarh street vendor; GRDRC order 27.01.2026; refusal to shift from Sector 22 to allotted Sector 15 vending zone site (allotted 06.01.2019, unchallenged); appellate authority under Section 20(4), Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014 not constituted — direct writ…
DismissedOpenStreet Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014 - Section 20 - Grievance Redressal Committee - Writ Petition (LB-RES) - Petitioners, street vendors of Turuvekere town, sought a writ of prohibition restraining Respondents Nos.
DisposedOpenJharkhand High Court; W.P.(S) No.7819 of 2025; Ananda Sen, J.; 15.01.2026; Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act 2014; Section 20(1); Section 36; Chapter-V; Jharkhand Street Vendors (Protection and Regulation of Livelihood) Rules 2015; Rule 5(i);
AllowedOpen
Show 6 more
Petitioner sought directions for removal of encroachment by a mattress vendor on a public street near his residence, including illegal parking and disconnection of an alleged illegal electricity connection.
Writ Petition (Civil)OpenDelhi High Court, W.P.(C) 6666/2025, Devi Charan v. New-Delhi Municipal Council — Tehbazari site substitution; Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act 2014, Section 5(2); certificate of vending; succession by spouse/dependent child in order of priority; legal heir;
Writ Petition (Civil)OpenReturn of plaint Order VII Rule 10 CPC; Section 9 CPC civil-court jurisdiction; no express or implied bar in Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014; Section 20 grievance/redressal committee; tehbazari holders; street vendors/hawkers;
Street vendors; Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act 2014; Town Vending Committee; survey of existing street vendors; certificate of vending; identity cards; vending zone; no eviction or relocation till survey completed;
DisposedOpenstreet vendor; registered street vendor; Town Vending Committee (TVC); Municipal Corporation Chandigarh; re-allocation of vending site; certificate of vending; alternative remedy; remedy of appeal; Section 11 Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act 2014;
DisposedOpenRoadside Rehri Phari Workers Union Distt Sas Nagar Mohali Vs State of Punjab and Another
Outcome: DismissedCWP-26646-2025; Roadside Rehri Phari Workers Union v. State of Punjab; Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014 Section 20; Punjab Street Vendors Rules, 2015 Rule 5; Dispute Redressal Committee / Dispute Resolution Forum, SAS Nagar Mohali; notification dated 22.01.2025;
DismissedOpen
A shop owner challenged peace-maintenance proceedings under Sections 170/126/135 BNSS arising out of a dispute with street vendors encroaching in front of his Lucknow shop.
Disabled petitioners sought mandamus to obtain licences/permission for bunk shops under the Street Vendors Act, 2014. The Court directed them to apply to the reconstituted Town Vending Committee in the prescribed format within two weeks;
DisposedOpenStreet vendor with a Certificate of Vending sought protection from harassment and removal from his vending site and sought treatment as a stationary vendor. The court disposed of the petition by directing that the petitioner not be interfered with in his vending activities, subject to compliance with the COV terms.
Writ Petition (Civil)OpenA certificate-of-vending holder sought protection from removal and treatment as a stationary street vendor. The court directed that he not be interdicted in vending subject to COV conditions, and that his representation be considered by the TVC.
Writ Petition (Civil)OpenHigh Court of Delhi directed that the petitioner, a street vendor holding a Certificate of Vending, shall not be interdicted or interfered with in carrying out vending activities, subject to complying with the certificate's terms.
Writ Petition (Civil)OpenA street vendor holding a Certificate of Vending sought protection from removal and a direction that he be treated as a stationary vendor. The court directed that he not be interdicted in vending subject to COV conditions, and that his representation before the Town Vending Committee be considered.
Writ Petition (Civil)Open
Show 4 more
The court issued an order allowing a street vendor to conduct vending activities strictly in accordance with his Certificate of Vending, restraining authorities from interference. The court directed authorities to process a pending representation regarding seized articles within four weeks.
Writ Petition (Civil)OpenStreet vendors with 2014 Act identity cards challenged notices under Section 185 of the Telangana Municipalities Act directing removal of their road-side structures within 24 hours. The Court directed them to approach the Section 20 committee under the 2014 Act within a week; the committee to decide within two weeks;
DisposedOpenThe High Court disposed of multiple writ petitions filed by street vendors challenging notices to remove road-side structures issued under the Telangana Municipalities Act.
DisposedOpenStreet vendors issued identity cards under the Street Vendors Act, 2014 challenged removal notices issued under Section 185 of the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019 by Ramagundam Municipal Corporation. The Court directed them to seek redressal before the committee under Section 20 of the 2014 Act within a week;
DisposedOpen