Section 22. Town Vending Committee
(1) The appropriate Government may, by rules made in this behalf, provide for the term and the manner of constituting a Town Vending Committee in each local authority:
Provided that the appropriate Government may, if considers necessary, provide for constitution of more than one Town Vending Committee, or a Town Vending Committee for each zone or ward, in each local authority.
(2) Each Town Vending Committee shall consist of:—
(a) Municipal Commissioner or Chief Executive Officer, as the case may be, who shall be the Chairperson; and
(b) such number of other members as may be prescribed, to be nominated by the appropriate Government, representing the local authority, medical officer of the local authority, the planning authority, traffic police, police, association of street vendors, market associations, traders associations, non-governmental organisations, community based organisations, resident welfare associations, banks and such other interests as it deems proper;
(c) the number of members nominated to represent the non-governmental organisations and the community based organisations shall not be less than ten per cent.;
(d) the number of members representing the street vendors shall not be less than forty per cent. who shall be elected by the street vendors themselves in such manner as may be prescribed:
Provided that one-third of members representing the street vendors shall be from amongst women vendors:
Provided further that due representation shall be given to the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes, minorities and persons with disabilities from amongst the members representing street vendors.
(3) The Chairperson and the members nominated under sub-section (2) shall receive such allowances as may be prescribed by the appropriate Government.
How courts have applied section 22
- Eligibility to hawk does not ipso facto confer a right to vote in Town Vending Committee elections; individual scrutiny and documentation are required.1,2,3
- The Town Vending Committee is the appropriate mechanism for resolving vendor obstruction disputes.4
- Nominated members who do not hold an office of profit are entitled to allowances at rates fixed by the Local Authority.5,6,7
- Statutory authorities must consider representations about committee constitution on merits and pass orders without undue delay.8,9
- Vendors in no-vending zones cannot claim inclusion in surveys or relocation.10
- Experts associated under Section 24 may only advise and have no right to vote.11
Read the full overviewShow less· 4 paragraphs
The judgements here mostly concern the composition and functioning of Town Vending Committees under Section 22 of the Street Vendors Act, 2014, particularly the election of street vendor members, the allowances payable to nominated members, and the duty of authorities to act on representations about committee formation. Several petitions sought mandamus to compel constitution or proper selection of committees, and courts held that statutory authorities are duty-bound to consider such representations on merits and pass appropriate orders rather than keep them pending, with non-consideration amounting to dereliction of duty. The courts also directed compliance with the statutory scheme, including surveys and demarcation of vending zones, and warned that failure attracts disciplinary consequences.12,8,9,13
On the election of street vendor members under Section 22(2)(d), the Bombay High Court upheld elections held on 29.08.2024 on a voters' list of 32,415 names, ruling that eligibility to hawk does not ipso facto confer voting rights; the 99,435 hawkers protected by prior orders still required individual scrutiny and documentation. Publication of the voters' list well before polling satisfied Rule 15 of the 2016 Rules, and rejecting incomplete applications was proper. The court directed a fresh survey upon constitution of the committee.1,2,3,14,15,16
On allowances under Section 22(3), Delhi High Court held that nominated members who do not hold an office of profit are entitled to allowances at rates fixed by the Local Authority, and directed the Commissioner to fix such allowances immediately, notwithstanding the provision's wording that rates be prescribed. The Punjab and Haryana High Court, however, declined to order honorarium beyond the prescribed attendance fee for elected members, while confirming that experts associated under Section 24 may only advise and have no right to vote.5,6,7,11
Regarding the committee's role, the Kerala High Court indicated that the Town Vending Committee is the appropriate mechanism for resolving disputes where vendors obstruct shop access. The Punjab and Haryana High Court confirmed the committee's composition per Rule 12(2) with 12 members. Courts also addressed the interaction with no-vending zones, holding that vendors squatting in such zones commit an illegality and cannot claim inclusion in surveys.4,11,10
By court
Outcomes
Judgements applying section 22
Contempt petition by a resident complaining of street-vendor encroachments blocking access in Kadayanallur, heard with writ petitions by street vendors seeking vending committees and zones under the Street Vendors Act, 2014.
DisposedOpenStreet Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act 2014; Section 22; Town Vending Committee election 30.05.2025; Town Vending Zone not identified; bunk shop removal; NSB Road Tiruchirappalli; Trichy Municipal Corporation Commissioner; representation dated 19.06.2025;
DisposedOpenPalani Municipality street vendor Vending Committee selection; Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulations of Street Vending) Act 2014 Section 22; Municipal Administration Department Circular dated 08.09.2023; unconsidered representation dated 05.02.2024;
DisposedOpenTown Vending Committee Chandigarh; composition fixed at 12 members under Rule 12(2) Street Vendors Rules 2015; temporary association of experts under S.24 Act of 2014 read with Rule 22 — advice only, no voting right; attendance fee Rs.1,000 per meeting under Rule 18, no further allowance;
DisposedOpenW.P.No.32034 of 2025, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, Justice Harinath.N, decided 24.11.2025. Six individual petitioners (street-vendor-related writ) sought mandamus against respondent Nos.
DisposedOpenStreet vendor writ petition disposed without entering merits; direction to respondent No.3 to decide petitioner's representation expeditiously. Key terms: Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act 2014, section 22, section 22(d);
DisposedOpen
Show 6 more
In a writ petition under Article 226, the Allahabad High Court directed the State of U.P. to decide a representation by the petitioners regarding unpaid allowances to town vending committee members. The court did not express an opinion on the merits but ordered a response within six weeks.
DisposedOpenThe Delhi High Court disposed of three writ petition regarding allowances for Town Vending Committee members. Relying on Section 22(3) of the SV Act and Rule 18 of the Delhi Rules, the Court directed the Commissioner of Municipal Corporation of Delhi to fix allowances forthwith for excluded members.
Writ Petition (Civil)OpenThe High Court of Delhi disposed of three writ petitions filed by Town Vending Committee (TVC) members seeking allowances. The court held that members without office of profit are entitled to allowances fixed by the competent authority.
Writ Petition (Civil)OpenThe High Court of Delhi held that Town Vending Committee members nominated by the appropriate government are entitled to allowances under the Street Vendors Act. It directed the Commissioner of Delhi Municipal Corporation to fix and pay these allowances forthwith, pending rule-making.
Writ Petition (Civil)OpenPetitioner sought direction to municipality to act on his representation against vegetable vendors obstructing his shop. Court directed municipality to place matter before the Town Vending Committee under Street Vendors Act, 2014 within two weeks, with a decision within two months.
DisposedOpenRedi Patri Footpath Vikrrata Ekata Munch and Ors. Vs South Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors.
Writ Petition (Civil)Street vendors' society and its members sought a writ directing the municipal corporation to survey them at their squatting sites in Lajpat Nagar's Central/Pushpa Market, an area declared a no-vending and no-squatting zone after the 1996 bomb blast.
Writ Petition (Civil)Open
All India Trade Union Congress Hawkers Union vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai
Outcome: DisposedStreet Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act 2014; S.22(2)(d) TVC elections Mumbai 29-08-2024; Rule 15 Maharashtra Street Vendors Rules 2016 voters list objections; 99,435 hawkers 2014 survey; 29,008 verification four months; Azad Hawkers Union WP 652/2017 2017 SCC OnLine Bom 10261;
DisposedOpenJanwadi Hawkers Sabha Th. President K. Narayan vs Town Vedning Committee-Mcgm Th. Its Chairperson
Outcome: DisposedHIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY (Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction), Coram A.S. Gadkari & Kamal Khata, JJ.; reserved 11.02.2026, pronounced 23.03.2026. Cluster of seven writ petitions (plus two interim applications) by hawker unions and vendor groups challenging the Registered Voters' List (electorate c.
DisposedOpenColaba Causeway Tourism Hawkers Stall Union vs State of Maharashtra Th. Urban Development Dept.
Outcome: DisposedBombay High Court (A.S. Gadkari and Kamal Khata, JJ.), judgment pronounced 23.03.2026 - connected writ petitions (lead WP(L) 29339/2024; WP 3690/2025, WP 3700/2025, WP(L) 7275/2025, WP(L) 25070/2024, WP 727/2025, WP(L) 4024/2025, WP(L) 4022/2025, IA(L) 8953/2025, IA(L) 9689/2025) by Maharashtra Ekta Hawkers Union,…
DisposedOpenAll India Trade Union Congress Hawkers Union vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai
Outcome: DisposedStreet Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act 2014; S.22(2)(d) TVC elections Mumbai 29-08-2024; Rule 15 Maharashtra Street Vendors Rules 2016 voters list objections; 99,435 hawkers 2014 survey; 29,008 verification four months; Azad Hawkers Union WP 652/2017 2017 SCC OnLine Bom 10261;
DisposedOpenJanwadi Hawkers Sabha Th. President K. Narayan vs Town Vedning Committee-Mcgm Th. Its Chairperson
Outcome: DisposedHIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY (Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction), Coram A.S. Gadkari & Kamal Khata, JJ.; reserved 11.02.2026, pronounced 23.03.2026. Cluster of seven writ petitions (plus two interim applications) by hawker unions and vendor groups challenging the Registered Voters' List (electorate c.
DisposedOpenColaba Causeway Tourism Hawkers Stall Union vs State of Maharashtra Th. Urban Development Dept.
Outcome: DisposedBombay High Court (A.S. Gadkari and Kamal Khata, JJ.), judgment pronounced 23.03.2026 - connected writ petitions (lead WP(L) 29339/2024; WP 3690/2025, WP 3700/2025, WP(L) 7275/2025, WP(L) 25070/2024, WP 727/2025, WP(L) 4024/2025, WP(L) 4022/2025, IA(L) 8953/2025, IA(L) 9689/2025) by Maharashtra Ekta Hawkers Union,…
DisposedOpen
Show 4 more
All India Trade Union Congress Hawkers Union vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai
Outcome: DisposedStreet Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act 2014; S.22(2)(d) TVC elections Mumbai 29-08-2024; Rule 15 Maharashtra Street Vendors Rules 2016 voters list objections; 99,435 hawkers 2014 survey; 29,008 verification four months; Azad Hawkers Union WP 652/2017 2017 SCC OnLine Bom 10261;
DisposedOpenJanwadi Hawkers Sabha Th. President K. Narayan vs Town Vedning Committee-Mcgm Th. Its Chairperson
Outcome: DisposedHIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY (Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction), Coram A.S. Gadkari & Kamal Khata, JJ.; reserved 11.02.2026, pronounced 23.03.2026. Cluster of seven writ petitions (plus two interim applications) by hawker unions and vendor groups challenging the Registered Voters' List (electorate c.
DisposedOpenColaba Causeway Tourism Hawkers Stall Union vs State of Maharashtra Th. Urban Development Dept.
Outcome: DisposedBombay High Court (A.S. Gadkari and Kamal Khata, JJ.), judgment pronounced 23.03.2026 - connected writ petitions (lead WP(L) 29339/2024; WP 3690/2025, WP 3700/2025, WP(L) 7275/2025, WP(L) 25070/2024, WP 727/2025, WP(L) 4024/2025, WP(L) 4022/2025, IA(L) 8953/2025, IA(L) 9689/2025) by Maharashtra Ekta Hawkers Union,…
DisposedOpenAll India Trade Union Congress Hawkers Union vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai
Outcome: DisposedStreet Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act 2014; S.22(2)(d) TVC elections Mumbai 29-08-2024; Rule 15 Maharashtra Street Vendors Rules 2016 voters list objections; 99,435 hawkers 2014 survey; 29,008 verification four months; Azad Hawkers Union WP 652/2017 2017 SCC OnLine Bom 10261;
DisposedOpen