MALKIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.T.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 9/4/2026, we had passed a detailed order, recognising that the efforts made by the respondent-State had borne some fruit. It was observed that any act by the State ought to ensure that there is minimum disruption of livelihood with adequate sense of fairness and responsibility. If the zones are identified, the authorities must also give the vendors adequate support to relocate. It has to be recognised that such relocation disrupts the customers of a particular vendor and also deprives the residents of immediate or proximate access to such vendors. The State had been asked to file affidavits indicating information about existing vending zones and all other relevant details.

(2.) Vide order dtd. 5/5/2026, we had asked certain officials of the respondent-union territory to be present in Court namely (i) The Chairperson (Commissioner), Town Vending Committee, Chandigarh; (ii) The Chairperson, GRDRC, Chandigarh; and (iii) The Secretary, Local Government and Home, Chandigarh, with whom we freely interacted. We had also perused the note of the learned amicus curiae Mr. Anant Vijay Palli, senior counsel.

(3.) On the said date, an affidavit was filed by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh in addition to earlier affidavit dtd. 25/4/2026. Inter-alia, it has been submitted that the Municipal Corporation website displays the detail of each relocated vendor through a searchable list; numerous anti-encroachment drives were carried out in which (approximately) 5400 challans have been issued, with 1150 approximately pertaining to Manimajra area. The number of registered vendors total to 10939, the division of which is as follows:- <IMG>JUDGEMENT_6_LAWS(SC)7_2026_1.jpg</IMG>