AJAY CHOUDHARY Vs. RANCHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the letters dtd. 2/7/2020 (Annexure-10 series to the writ petition) issued by the Deputy Municipal Commissioner, Ranchi Municipal Corporation, Ranchi-respondent no.3, whereby allotments of respective shops of the petitioners have been cancelled.

(2.) The factual background of the case, as stated in the writ petition, is that the petitioners/their fathers were street vendors engaged in selling fish, chicken etc. in Ratu Road area (Khadgarha Market) and businesses of some of the petitioiners were recognized by the Ranchi Municipal Corporation by issuing licences under Sec. 407 of the Ranchi Municipal Corporation Act, 2001. Registration Certificates were also issued to some of the petitioners by Food Safety Administration, Department of Health, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi under Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. RMC launched an encroachment drive in the year 2011 and thereafter notice dtd. 8/11/2011 was served upon the petitioners for eviction within 3 days. Some of the petitioners and the private respondents challenged the said notice by filing a writ petition being W.P.(C) No.6842 of 2011, which was disposed of vide order dtd. 19/12/2011 giving liberty to file representation(s) before the Chief Executive Officer, RMC, Ranchi and on filing of such representation(s), the said authority was to consider the same and pass appropriate order. In compliance of the said order, the petitioners filed representation before the concerned authority of RMC whereupon they were informed that whenever any shop would be constructed they would have preferential right over the same. In the meantime, the Parliament promulgated the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act, 2014') to protect the rights of urban street vendors, to regulate street vending activities and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. The State of Jharkhand by invoking powers under Sec. 36 of the Act, 2014 thereafter framed the Jharkhand Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Rules, 2015. Subsequently, the State of Jharkhand, in terms with Sec. 38 of the Act, 2014 prepared a scheme for Street Vendors known as Jharkhand Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation) Scheme, 2017. RMC made survey of the street vendors including the petitioners after dividing the Ranchi Municipal Area into 44 Urban Local Bodies and the vending zones were constructed at few places like Atal Smriti Vendor Market, Jaypal Singh Stadium, Ranchi and Madhukam, Khardgarha Market, Ratu Road, Ranchi. The petitioners, thereafter, made joint representation before the respondent no.2 requesting inter alia to make allotment of shops according to their names and addresses furnished by them. The pictures of respective temporary vending area were also enclosed with the representation so that no outsider might obtain allotment of the shop. Lottery was held by the RMC under the Chairmanship of Deputy Mayor on 26/10/2019 for allotment of 39 shops, which was also videographed. The respondent no.3 vide letters dtd. 06/8/11/2019 informed the petitioners that they were allotted the respective shops through lottery process and asked them to deposit rent for six months amounting to Rs.7,450.00 plus GST @ 18% i.e. Rs.1,341.00; total Rs.8,791.00. The petitioners immediately deposited the required amount and to that effect, acknowledgement receipts were also issued to them. They were also given possession of their respective shops in which they made investment for installing shutters, deep freezers as well as interior fittings. They also applied for obtaining electrical connections. Despite the said fact, the respondent no.3 vide letters dtd. 2/7/2020 arbitrarily cancelled the allotment of the said shops, which gives rise to filing of the present writ petition.

(3.) The learned senior counsel for the petitioners submits that the impugned letters dtd. 2/7/2020 have been issued in violation of the principles of natural justice, as no opportunity of hearing was provided to the petitioners before passing the orders as contained in the impugned letters. The shops in question are the only source of their livelihood. They have also invested their hard earned money in their allotted shops for betterment of their business. The said allotment cannot be cancelled in a summary manner that too without assigning any reason. It is further submitted that the impugned letters are arbitrary, whimsical and without jurisdiction and against the very object of the Act, 2014. Learned senior counsel for the petitioners also submits that by invoking power under Sec. 38 of the Act, 2014, a Scheme known as Jharkhand Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation) Scheme, 2017 was framed by the State Govt. vide notification dtd. 31/3/2017. Under Clause 20.5 of the said scheme, the allotment was required to be done through lottery which was duly followed while making allotment of the said shops to the petitioners. Moreover, there are several infirmities in the enquiry report on perusal of which it would be evident that the same is a table report, as date and time of visiting the spot has not been mentioned in the same. It is further submitted that some of the family members of the petitioners are also the street vendors and their names were mentioned in the list prepared under the said scheme duly approved by the respective Ward Councillors. The notice for conducting lottery was kept in public domain by publishing it on Information Display Board of the RMC and the objections were also invited. As such, the contention of the private respondents that no public notice was issued before holding the lottery is completely misconceived.