Delhi High Court
Ashwani Kumar & Ors. vs Ndmc & Ors. on 14 December, 2016
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ LPA 346/2016 & CM Nos.20733-34/2016
% Date of Judgment: 14th December, 2016
ASHWANI KUMAR & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr.Satish Kumar Tripathi, Advocate
versus
NDMC & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Ms.Malvika Trivedi, Advocate with
Mr.Jitendra Kumar Tripathi, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL
G.S.SISTANI, J. (ORAL)
1. Although this matter was adjourned for 19th January, 2017 since the
matter is listed today, both counsel submit that the matter can be
disposed of today itself. Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed
by a Single Bench of this Court dated 3 rd May, 2016. Learned counsel
for the parties submit that the only bone of contention between the
parties which remains today is that while disposing of the writ petition
the Single Judge permitted the appellants to continue to carry on their
activities provided they adhere to the norms as per the permission
granted by the NDMC. On 8th August, 2016, the following order was
passed:
"The appellant will file an affidavit indicating the
different types of goods they want to vend with a
copy to the counsel for the respondent.
Prima facie we are in agreement with the appellants
that they cannot be prohibited and compelled to sell
water and aerated drinks and not sell wafers, chips
etc. Such restrictions and stipulations would be
arbitrary and capricious.
It also appears that there is no justification and
reason for putting restrictions on the vending hours
between sunrise and sunset as this would depend
on the market needs and requirements.
Learned counsel for the respondent/NDMC states
that the appellant had sub-let or assigned the teh
bazari rights. Counsel for the appellant accepts
that in case there is any sub-letting or assignment,
the respondents are entitled to take action as per
law."
2. Pursuant to the order passed by the Division bench, the appellants
have filed affidavits giving undertaking that they would sell only
packed aerated water which would include soft drinks and also sell
packed beverages and packed chips, namkins but no cooking activity
of any nature shall be carried out at the vending site. Learned counsel
for the appellants, on instructions, submits that the vendors will not
violate any of the norms/terms of the NDMC and they will not occupy
area more than allotted to them or sub-let or assign their rights and in
case any of the terms of the undertaking is violated, the NDMC would
be free to take such action as available in accordance with law.
3. Mr.Tripathi submits that as per permission granted handicapped
person will only take the assistance of a helper.
4. Learned counsel for the NDMC submits that assistance of a helper is
often misused and the challans are subsequently cut in the name of the
helper who then claims independent right. It is agreed that a helper
will be permitted only in the presence of the vender to whom
permission has been granted to vend.
5. Accordingly, the undertakings filed and the statements made in Court
today are taken on record.
6. Mr.Tripathhi, learned counsel for the appellants, submits that the
challans will not be cut in the name of the helper.
7. We make it clear that the helper will be employed strictly in terms of
the permission granted by the NDMC.
8. As prayed, the goods sealed will be released in accordance with law.
9. With these directions this appeal is disposed of along with pending
applications.
10. The date fixed in the matter on 9th January, 2017 is cancelled.
G. S. SISTANI, J.
VINOD GOEL, J.
DECEMBER 14, 2016
Jitender
