Disposed

Kishor Sah v. South Delhi Municipal Corporation & Anr.

Delhi HC13 Apr 2018W.P.(C)/9874/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition for protection of vending livelihood disposed of with direction to TVC to consider the case upon constitution, while making it clear that non-appearance during survey will not be a ground for rejection. The court reserved opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Disposed with direction to TVC to consider petitioner's case upon constitution; clarified that temporary absenteeism during survey does not lead to rejection.

Kishor Sah Vs South Delhi Municipal Corporation & Anr. — Service and Employment | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~2

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(C) 9874/2017

¶4

KISHOR SAH ..... Petitioner

¶5

Through Mr. Anand Shailani, Advocate.

¶6

versus

¶7

SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ANR

¶8

..... Respondents

¶9

Through Ms. Arunima Dwivedi with Ms. Preeti Kumra, Advocates for SDMC.

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL

¶11

O R D E R % 13.04.2018

¶12

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been vending at Service Road, Behind South Moti Bagh Bus Stand, South Moti Bagh, New Delhi since the year 1995 and is selling snacks, packaged drinking water etc. On account of harassment being faced by him by the officials of the respondent has led to the filing of the present writ petition. Counsel submits that since fresh rules of Delhi Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Rules 2017 have been notified and also the election of the TVC is likely to be conducted shortly, the present writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to the TVC to consider the case of the petitioner as and when it is constituted in accordance with law and merely because he may not be found vending at the spot at the time of the survey, should not be a ground to reject his case.

¶13

Counsel for the respondent without admitting any of the averments made

¶14

in the writ petition submits that in case the petitioner approaches the TVC as and when it is constituted with all supporting documents, the case of the petitioner would be considered in accordance with law and merely because he is not found vending at the spot at the time of survey, that would not be a ground to reject his case.

¶15

In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶16

We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and this order is being passed without prejudice to the rights and contentions of both the parties.

¶17

G.S.SISTANI, J

¶18

SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J APRIL 13, 2018/ ck/ W.P.(C) 9874/2017 2/2

Kishor Sah v. South Delhi Municipal Corporation & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kishor Sah v. South Delhi Municipal Corporation & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr Ananya Sharma Vs All India Institute of Medical Sciences

Tulsi Dass Vs M/S Reva Auto Industries

Mohd. Sajid Vs Union of India and Ors.

First Overseas Vs UOI & Anr.

Union of India & Anr. Vs B.C. Kailay

Debasis Bera Vs Union of India, through Its Secretary and Anr.

Rajesh Prasad Srivastava Vs Union of India and Ors.

Arun Kumar & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Kaptan Singh Vs Union of India & Ors.

Dinesh Kumar & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Praduman Patel Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Foranti Meena Vs Government of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Shakil Ahmed Vs South Delhi Municipal Corporation & Anr.

M L Lakhanpal Vs Darshan Lal & Anr.