Allahabad High Court
Dharmendra Kumar Shukla And 19 ... vs State Of U.P. And 6 Others on 16 January, 2023
Bench: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, Vivek Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 40
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 36195 of 2022
Petitioner :- Dharmendra Kumar Shukla And 19 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sudhir Mehrotra,Navin Kumar
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Kaushalendra Nath Singh
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 9873 of 2021
Petitioner :- Suresh Sah And 11 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Syed Fahim Ahmed
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Kaushalendra Nath Singh
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 28162 of 2022
Petitioner :- Shiv Shanker Chaudhary And 11 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar Nishad,Shashi Kant Shukla
Counsel for Respondent :- CSC,Aditya Bhushan Singhal,Kaushalendra Nath Singh,Manoj Kumar Dhuriya
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Shri Sudhir Mehrotra, learned counsel for the petitioners; Shri Apurva Hajela, learned Standing Counsel for State respondents and Shri M.C. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Aditya Bhushan Singhal and Shri Kaushalendra Nath Singh for NOIDA.
Since the controversy involved in all the writ petitions are similar, with the consent of parties, all the writ petitions are being decided by this common judgment.
The facts of WRIT - C No. - 36195 of 2022 are being taken as leading case for deciding the controversy.
Present writ petition has been preferred for following reliefs:-
"A. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding respondent nos.2 to 6 not to evict or dispossess the petitioners from their existing vending site at Brahamputra Shopping Complex, Sector 29, Noida uner the mandate of Section 3 (3) and 27 of the Act as well as the order dated 28.3.2014 passed in Writ Petition No.18271 of 2014.
B. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing respondent nos.2 to 4 to declare the existing market area of Sector 29 Noida as natural/ heritage market in view of section 2 (e) and Ist Schedule of the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014.
C. Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus to respondent no.2 to decide the representation dated 14.11.2022 made before it on 15.11.2022 of the petitioners and not to evict them from their existing vending site till the respondent no.2 decides the representation in accordance with law."
On the matter being taken up on 29.11.2022, the Court has proceeded to pass the following order:-
"On 11.5.2017, this Court in Writ - C No. 17013 of 2017 required the Chief Secretary to file an affidavit indicating the time frame for effective enforcement of the provisions of the U.P. Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Rules, 2017.
Under the Act and the Rules, the Town Vending Committees and Grievance Committees are to be constituted to perform different functions assigned to them.
A large number of petitions are being filed before this Court by street vendors, raising different kinds of grievances. We find that because of the fact that Grievance Committees have not been constituted so far, this Court is getting flooded with litigations under the Act which in ordinary course would have been dealt with by the Grievance Committees.
We accordingly permit Sri Rajiv Gupta, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel to obtain instructions from the Chief Secretary on the above aspect and apprise the Court of the reasons for not taking appropriate action in the matter so far.
List as fresh on 13.12.2022, along with record of Writ - C No. 9873 of 2021."
On the matter being taken up today, Shri M.C. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Counsel appearing for NOIDA states that second affidavit of compliance dated 16.1.2023 has already been filed on behalf of respondent nos.2, 3 and 4 in connected Writ Petition No.28162 of 2022 stating therein that the Special Secretary, Government of U.P., Lucknow has sent a letter dated 30.12.2022 to the Chief Executive Officers of the respondent authority as well as GNIDA and YEIDA requiring the development authorities to constitute a Redressal Grievance Committee under Section 20 of the Act of 2014. Vide office order dated 3.1.2023 the Redressal Grievance Committee as envisaged under Section 20 of the Act 2014 has been constituted. The office order dated 3.1.2023 is brought on record as Annexure No.2 to the said second affidavit of compliance. In this backdrop, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the NOIDA submits that cause for filing the writ petition no more survives as the Redressal Grievance Committee has already been constituted.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that once the Redressal Grievance Committee has already been constituted, the petitioners can agitate all his grievances before the said Committee, which is competent enough to redress the grievances of the petitioners.
With the aforesaid observations, all the writ petitions stand disposed of.
Order Date :- 16.1.2023
SP/
