High Court of Meghalaya
Meghalaya & Greater Shillong vs . State Of Meghalaya & Ors on 24 August, 2022
Serial No. 1
Regular List
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
AT SHILLONG
WA No. 87/2016 with
MC (WA) No. 96/2016 with
Cont. Cas (C) No. 26/2016
WA No. 89/2016
WP (C) No. 410/2016
WP (C) No. 497/2019
WP (C) No. 509/2019
Cont. Cas (C) No. 41/2018
Date of Order: 24.08.2022
Meghalaya & Greater Shillong Vs. State of Meghalaya & ors
Progressive Hawkers & Street
Vendors Association (M&GSPH&SVA)
& anr
Meghalaya & Greater Shillong Vs. State of Meghalaya & ors
Progressive Hawkers & Street
Vendors Association (M&GSPH&SVA)
& anr
In Re Suo Motu contempt proceedings Vs. -
against the CEO, Municipal Board,
Shillong arising out of WA No. 87/2016
Shri. E.H. Chen & ors Vs. State of Meghalaya & ors
Meghalaya & Greater Shillong Vs. State of Meghalaya & ors
Progressive Hawkers & Street
Vendors Association (M&GSPH&SVA)
& anr
Shankarlal Singhania & ors. Vs. State of Meghalaya & ors.
Meghalaya & Greater Shillong Vs. State of Meghalaya & ors.
Progressive Hawkers & Street
Vendors Association, M&GSPH&SVA
J.M. Thangkhiew Vs. E.H. Chen & ors
Page 1 of 5
Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjib Banerjee, Chief Justice
Hon'ble Mr. Justice W. Diengdoh, Judge
Appearance in WA No.87 of 2016:
For the Appellants : Mr. K. Paul, Sr. Adv. with
Mr. F. Dkhar, Adv
For the Respondents : Mr. Philemon Nongbri, Adv
Mr. H.L. Shangreiso, Sr.Adv with
Mr. R. Majaw, Adv
Ms. A. Kharshiing, Adv
Appearance in MC (WA) No.96 of 2016:
For the Applicants : Mr. K. Paul, Sr. Adv. with
Mr. F. Dkhar, Adv
For the Respondents : Mr. Philemon Nongbri, Adv
Mr. H.L. Shangreiso, Sr.Adv with
Mr. R. Majaw, Adv
Ms. A. Kharshiing, Adv
Appearance in Cont.Cas(C) No.26 of 2016
Arising out of WA No.87 of 2016:
For the Petitioner : -
For the Respondent : -
Appearance in WA No.89 of 2016:
For the Appellants : Mr. H.L. Shangreiso, Sr.Adv with
Mr. R. Majaw, Adv
Ms. A. Kharshiing, Adv
For the Respondents : Mr. Philemon Nongbri, Adv
Mr. K. Paul, Sr. Adv. with
Mr. F. Dkhar, Adv
Appearance in WP (C) No.410 of 2016:
For the Petitioners : Mr. K. Paul, Sr. Adv. with
Mr. F. Dkhar, Adv
For the Respondents : Mr. Philemon Nongbri, Adv
Dr. N. Mozika, ASG with
Ms. S. Rumthao, Adv
Appearance in WP (C) No.497 of 2019:
For the Petitioners : Mr. M.L. Nongpiur, Adv vice
Mr. U.K. Nair, Sr.Adv
For the Respondents : Mr. S Sengupta, Addl.Sr.GA
Appearance in WP (C) No.509 of 2019:
For the Petitioner : Mr. P. Yobin, Adv
For the Respondents : Mr. S. Sengupta, Addl. Sr. GA
Mr. V.G.K. Kynta, Sr.Adv with
Ms. M. Kynta, Adv
Appearance in Cont.Cas(C) No.41 of 2018:
For the Petitioner : None
For the Respondents : Mr. P. Yobin, Adv
Mr. H.L. Shangreiso, Sr.Adv with
Mr. R. Majaw, Adv
Ms. A. Kharshiing, Adv
i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No
Law journals etc.:
ii) Whether approved for publication
in press: Yes/No
JUDGMENT: (per the Hon'ble, the Chief Justice) (Oral)
These appeals and writ petitions pertain to street-vending,
primarily in Shillong and the surrounding areas. Several hawkers or
hawkers' bodies have come up complaining against the State or the local
authorities in seeking to organise the business or demarcating prohibited
areas or the like.
2. Despite there being a Central statute pertaining to street-
vending, hawking and the like, the State introduced its own enactment
and formulated rules thereunder. The substance of the challenge in the
two appeals arising out of a common writ petition and in the three other
independent writ petitions appears to be somewhat similar.
3. The matters have remained pending for a considerable period of
time since the State was contemplating to adopt the Central statute and
jettison its own. The State has now formally done so and has also made
rules or is in the process of completing the making of rules for
implementing the Central statute in the State. Further, taking a cue from
observations of the Court and upon noticing several crowded areas being
overrun by hawkers and the pavements not being available for
pedestrians, certain new regulations have been issued.
4. In the light of the recent developments, particularly the State
Act being abandoned and the Central statute being adopted, the two
appeals and the three writ petitions have lost their meaning. Accordingly,
WA No.87 of 2016 along with MC (WA) No.96 of 2016 and WA No.89
of 2016 arising out of WP (C) No.229 of 2015 are disposed of along with
the writ petition without any further or other order. Similarly, WP (C)
No.410 of 2016, WP (C) No.497 of 2019 and WP (C) No.509 of 2019 are
also disposed of without going into the merits of the matters or addressing
any of the issues raised.
5. In the event the writ petitioners or other parties have any
grievance against the present system or any other matter, fresh challenges
may be launched in accordance with law notwithstanding the present
order.
6. The contempt proceedings are also dropped as the original
orders passed may have lost force in the wake of the new developments.
Cont.Cas(C) No.26 of 2016 and Cont.Cas(C) No.41 of 2018 are disposed
of. If any rule had been issued, the same stands discharged.
7. It is hoped that the preparation of rules is completed and
uniform implementation thereof undertaken in a time-bound manner so
that there is no uncertainty or arbitrariness about the process.
8. There will be no order as to costs.
(W. Diengdoh) (Sanjib Banerjee)
Judge Chief Justice
Meghalaya
24.08.2022
"Lam DR-PS"
