Raju Kumar And 5 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another
2024 Latest Caselaw 20021 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Raju Kumar And 5 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 30 May, 2024

Author: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi

Bench: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:99691-DB
 
Court No. - 2
 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 18863 of 2024
 
Petitioner :- Raju Kumar And 5 Others
 
Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Navin Kumar
 
Counsel for Respondent :- Anjali Upadhya,C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
 

Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners; Sri Devesh Vikram, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondent no. 1 and Mrs. Anjali Upadhya, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2.

2. The present writ petition has been filed seeking following reliefs:-

"(i) a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the second respondent to strictly adhere the mandate of section 3(3) of The Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014 for which government order no. 557 dated 15.6.2017 has been issued.

(ii) a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 2 not to evict or disturb vending activities of the petitioners till certificate of vending issued in accordance with law."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners in support of his submissions has placed reliance upon the judgment passed by this Court in Dilip Paswan And 2 Others V/s. State of U.P. and 3 Others (Writ-C No. 15230 of 2024, dt. 8.5.2024) and as such it is sought to be contended that the present matter is squarely covered by the aforesaid judgment and the similar treatment may also be extended to the petitioners.

4. The said relief is resisted by Mrs. Anjali Upadhya, learned counsel for the contesting-respondent qua the petitioner nos. 4 to 6 on the ground that in the survey, their names had not been found and as such they are not carrying out any activity at the road side. So far as aforesaid relief qua the petitioner nos. 1 to 3, she has no objection in case the present matter is disposed of in terms of Dilip Paswan (supra).

5. In view of the above, the present writ petition stands dismissed qua the petitioner nos. 4 to 6. So far as the petitioner nos. 1 to 3 are concerned, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of Dilip Paswan (supra).

Order Date :- 30.5.2024

A.K.Srivastava