Street vendors should possess domicile certificates: HC

The remarks came while the court was hearing a suo motu case regarding the failure of the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) and the Mumbai Police to curb illegal hawking in accordance with the Street Vendors Act, 2014

MUMBAI: The Bombay high court on Friday said that all hawkers should possess a domicile certificate and that every vendor should be known to the Maharashtra government.

Mumbai, India - Jan. 16, 2025: Hawkers at Colaba causeway, in Mumbai, India, on Thursday, January 16, 2025. (Photo by Anshuman Poyrekar/ Hindustan Times) (Hindustan Times)

The remarks came while the court was hearing a suo motu case regarding the failure of the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) and the Mumbai Police to curb illegal hawking in accordance with the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014.

During Friday’s hearing, the BMC’s counsel emphasised the importance of the Town Vending Committee (TVC) elections for the swift implementation of hawker-related policies. “In the absence of elected TVCs, a fresh vendor survey remains a challenge,” the counsel told the court.

Setting up elected TVCs to regulate hawking was one of the stipulations under the Street Vendors Act. Ten years after the Act was introduced, a period that saw multiple legal battles over illegal hawking, the BMC finally held the first-ever TVC elections in August last year, in which 32,415 registered street vendors were eligible to vote.

However, the Supreme Court had directed the BMC to reserve the counting of votes after hawker unions approached it saying the electoral list prepared by the civic body was incorrect and should have included a minimum of 99,000 hawkers. The results are yet to be declared while the case continues to be heard in the Supreme Court.

During Friday’s hearing in the high court, a counsel appearing for the hawkers again raised concerns over the reduced number of hawkers who were eligible to vote in the TVC elections. They alleged that a reply filed by the BMC earlier relied on a 2017 high court order, highlighting that a survey conducted by the TVCs after 2014 shall be construed as the first survey. Based on that, the BMC excluded many vendors from the list, the hawkers argued.

The division bench of justices AS Gadkari and Kamal Khata then asked the BMC to explain the decline in eligible hawkers. “There must be a plausible explanation for the sharp decline,” it said.

The BMC replied that hawkers who didn’t meet the eligibility criteria were excluded from the voter list. The eligibility criteria included four factors: having a domicile certificate, being above the age of 14 years, not having another business source and, lastly, holding Indian citizenship. The vendors who did not meet all the requirements were disqualified from the list, the civic body said.

The bench, highlighting the need to secure the rights of vendors in the state, then suggested that all vendors should have domicile certificates. “This is important. Otherwise, anyone from different states can come here and conduct their business without being answerable,” the court said.

The BMC’s counsel then informed the court that the same law is applicable in Delhi, where vendors are not only required to have a domicile but also have their names enrolled in the electoral list. Acknowledging this, the court requested the BMC to assist it in streamlining the process. “What are your difficulties? Assist us so we can ensure smooth implementation of the process,” the court said.

The bench highlighted the persisting issue of illegal hawkers setting up their stalls at several places in the city despite many court orders calling for their dismissal. “This is a CBD—Central Business District. You cannot pick and choose to determine the vending zones,” it said. In response, the BMC’s counsel assured the court it would try to improve the situation.

The court listed the next hearing in the case for February 24 and reiterated that the previous order on curbing illegal hawkers across the city would prevail until then.