Case Note & Summary
The case involved a series of writ petitions filed by pavement traders in Delhi, claiming violations of their fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21 of the Constitution by municipal authorities. The Supreme Court referred these petitions to a Constitution Bench, which previously ruled in Sodan Singh & Others v. New Delhi Municipal Committee that the right to trade on public streets is a fundamental right, subject to reasonable restrictions. Following this, the NDMC established a scheme to regulate street trading, leading to the formation of the Thareja Committee to assess claims from squatters. The Committee faced challenges in verifying claims due to strict proof requirements, which many genuine claimants could not meet. The court recognized the need for a compassionate approach to ensure that the livelihoods of genuine hawkers were not jeopardized by technicalities. It directed the Committee to review rejected claims and adopt a more flexible standard of proof, particularly for claimants in areas like Sarojini Nagar. The court also mandated public advertisements to invite claims from those who had not previously applied, ensuring that all eligible squatters had the opportunity to be heard. The court's decision aimed to balance the rights of street traders with the need for public order and pedestrian access, ultimately directing the NDMC to accommodate genuine claims while preventing exploitation of the system.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Fundamental Rights - Street Trading - Right to trade on public streets is recognized as a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution, but it is subject to reasonable restrictions imposed by the State under Article 19(6). The court held that while citizens have the right to use public streets, this right does not extend to occupying specific places permanently, ensuring pedestrian rights are also respected (Paras 252E-G). B) Constitutional Law - Compassionate Approach - The court emphasized the need for a compassionate approach towards genuine squatters and hawkers to ensure their livelihood while preventing exploitation of the legal process. Directions were issued for reviewing claims and ensuring fair treatment of all claimants (Paras 285C-D). C) Administrative Law - Claim Scrutiny - The court directed the Thareja Committee to review claims rejected for non-compliance with proof standards, allowing for a more flexible approach in specific areas like Sarojini Nagar, to accommodate genuine claimants (Paras 258E-261A).
Issue of Consideration
Whether street trading is a fundamental right and the extent of regulation permissible by the State.
Final Decision
The court upheld the right to street trading under Article 19(1)(g) but clarified that this right is subject to reasonable restrictions. It directed the Thareja Committee to review claims and adopt a compassionate approach to ensure genuine hawkers are not denied their livelihood.
Law Points
- fundamental rights
- street trading
- reasonable restrictions
- public streets
- hawkers' rights
