Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Vishakha City Beach Street Vendors ... vs The State Of Ap on 19 October, 2022
iN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AF# (SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTI WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWENTY TWO :PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI WRIT PETITION NO: 33572 OF 2022 Between: 1. Vishakha City Beach Street Vendors Association, Represented by its president, Tundi Trinadha Rao, S/o Late Achanna, Aged 59 years, R/o 15-8- 33, Venkateswara Nagar, Beach Road, Maharanipeta, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District 2. Tundi Trinadha Rao, S/o Late Achanna, Aged 59 years, R/o 15-8-33, Venkateswara Nagar, Beach' Road, Maharanipeta, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. .. Petitioners AND 1. The State of AP, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, (MAUD), Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Thullur Mandal, Guntur District. 2. The Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Rep. by its Commissioner, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 3. The Police Commissioner, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. | ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order, or Direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 2" and 3 respondents in not removing and implicitly allowing the iron containers in ward no. 21 & 29, Near Sea Pearl/ Gokul Beach Park, Beach Road, Visakhapatnam to do vending business as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of Art. 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2" and 3% respondents to remove forthwith the permanent iron containers for selling food and put up at ward no. 21 and 29, Near Sea Pearl/ Gokul Beach Park, Beach Road, Visakhapatnam and. further direct the respondent authorities to initiate necessary penal actions against the persons raising permanent iron containers without obtaining necessary permissions from the authorities committees. ; i 1A NO: 1 OF 2022: Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 2 and 3° respondent to seal the iron container at ward no. 21 and 29, Near Sea Pearl/ Gokul Beach Park, Beach Road, Visakhapatnam which was established at the area designated for public parking, Pending disposal of WP 33572 of 2022, on the file of the High Court. _ The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of PONNADA SREE VYAS Advocate for the Petitioners and of GP for MAUD for the Respondent No.1 and of Sri S.Lakshminarayana Reddy, !earned Standing Counsel for the Respondent No.2 and of GP for HOME for the Respondent No.3 and the Court made the following . ORDER:
"4, The petitioners have filed resolution of the General Body meeting of Visakhapatnam Street Vendors Welfare Society vide Memo of document dated 18.10.2022, authorizing the petitioner No.2 to file the petition on behalf of the Association.
2. The petitioner Vishakha City Beach Street Vendors Association (in short the Association) as petitioner No.1 along with its President, the petitioner No.2 has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a writ in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of respondent Nos.2 and 3 i.e. Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation (GVMC) and Police Commissioner respectively, in not removing and implicitly allowing some iron containers in . Ward. Nos.21 and 29, near sea _ pearl, Beach Road, Visakhapatnam to-do vending business with further prayer to remove the same' with direction. to respondent authorities to initiate necessary action under the Street Vendors (Protection of livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014 (in short the Act 2014).
3. Sri K.S.Murthy, learned senior advocate assisted by Sri Ponnada Sri Vyas, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner No.2 is a street vendor for which the Municipal Corporation has granted licence which is valid up to 01.01.2023 for the place of vending "RK Beach". But some unknown persons are also vending at the same. place and_ in particular, the place as mentioned in the prayer and quoted above, without any vending licence. Raising the said grievance, the petitioner approached the Municipal Corporation, but till date no action has been taken. On the other hand, the Police authorities..are asking the petitioner not to vend. He submits that under the Act 2014, certificate of vending is issued with respect to the vending ,zone and _ the vending:zone as defined under Section 2 (n) is designated by the local authority on the: recommendations of the Town Vending Committee. His submission is that because the certificate of vending has been granted to the petitioner No.2, it means that the said area has been declared as vending zone and consequently in the said vending zone, any unauthorized vending is not permitted. Penal action is required to be taken against those such vendors under Section 28 of the Act as also action for their removal under Rule . 9 of the Andhra Pradesh State Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vendors) Rules, 2017 (in short the Rules 2017). a
4. Sri S.Lakshminarayana: «Reddy, learned Standing counsel for the respondent No.2 submits that the. matter for the location designation as "vending zone" is still under process and the matter is pending at the level of the Town Division Committee.. He further submits that the petitioners have annexed only one certificate of vending in favour of the petitioner No.2, who is the President of the Association, but neither it has been mentioned as to how many members of the association are having the vending certificate nor their certificates have been annexed. He submits, on the basis of instructions that the members of the Welfare Association, who have no vending certificate, are also engaged in vending at the same place. He further submits that the names of those street vendors with respect to which it is alleged that they are vending 'in' the "public place as Park has not been disclosed neither in the representation 'submitted nor in the writ petition. Those persons have not been" impleaded in the petition. He submits that though under the Act and the Rules, it is the duty of the Corporation to stop the vending without the certificate of vending, in the vending zone and in no vending zone, licence/certificate is not to be granted, but unless the full information is, given to the Corporation, the Corporation face a difficulty to take action to stop the unlicenced vendors.
5. He prays for four (04) weeks time to file counter affidavit, specifically stating, if the area in question: with respect to which the petition has been filed is a vending zone within meaning for Section 2 (n) of the Act or not. If the certificate of vending have been issued with respect to the said area or not and if issued it will be disclosed to how many street vendors with particulars. .
6. The petitioner shall also file affidavit bringing on record the list of its members, who have been issued certificates of vending for the area in question.
ett ta SES
7. Learned senior advocate'.submits that the petitioners are ready to cooperate with the Municipal Corporation in furnishing the details of those unlicenced vendors and shall furnish necessary details of the members of the petitioners' Association vending on street/place in question, as also of other vendors without. certificates in their knowledge.
8. Let the petitioners submit aforesaid information within a period of one (01) week and thereafter the respondent No.2 shall consider the petitioners' representation | | and. shall pass appropriate orders thereon, after affording opportunity of hearing to the effected persons. The Municipal Corporation shall take necéssary action as per law with respect to all the unlicenced vendors if certificate.of vending is required under law but those street vendors are vending without such certificates, including the members of the petitioner No.1, Association.
9. Liston 07.12.2022." /\ Sd/-N.NAGAMMA a ASSI yo {TRUE COPY! Fo,. SECTION OFFICER.
To,
7. . The Principal Secretary The State of AP, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, (MAUD), Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Thullur Mandal, Guntur District: "(by RPAD) The Commissioner The Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. (by RPAD) pre Police Coinmissioner, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. (by PAD) -
One CC to SRI. PONNADA SREE VYAS Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to GP for MAUD [OUT].
One CC to Sri S.Lakshminarayana Reddy, learned Standing Counsel [OPUC] .
Two CCs to GP for Home [OUT] One spare copy ER HIGH COURT RNT, J DATED:719/10/2022 LIST ON 07.12.2022 ORDER WP.No.33572 of 2022