Delhi HC Undermines the Parliament

 The Delhi High Court judges Hon Justice Vipin Sanghi and Jasmeet Singh have taken upon themselves to clean up the city. It's not that they are worried about the huge filth that lies around or the unprecedented levels of air and water pollution, but want to get rid of all street vendors. Perhaps they have had some personal issues with vendors and are using their position to take on an entire community who provide affordable goods to the poor.

Their observations seem to assume powers beyond the parliament. 

"6.In our prima facie view, it appears to us that the scheme of the Street Vendors Act and the Rules framed thereunder greatly tilts the balance to encourage street vending. Pertinently, the plan for street vending, under Section 21, itself is required to be prepared “to promote the vocation of street vendors”. 

7.Clause 1(a) of the First Schedule provides that the plan for street vending shall ensure that all existing street vendors identified in the survey, subject to a norm confirming to, two and half per cent of the population of the ward, zone, town or city, as the case may be, are accommodated in the plan for street vending. For a Mega City like Delhi – with a population of about 2 Crores, the number of street vendors, according to the plan, would be about 5 Lakhs. 

8.It needs serious consideration whether, while protecting and promoting street vending – by enacting the Street Vendors Act, aspects regarding planned development of cities and towns has been compromised.Even more important, in our view, is the possible infringement of Fundamental Rights of the Citizens who live in any city, or town, particularly, under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, as the Right to Life guaranteed by the said Article is not a right of mere animal existence, but a right to enjoy security, safety and a life in a healthy environment."

So their observations have nullified the Street Vendors Act, 2014 which is an Act of the Parliament of India enacted to regulate street vendors in public areas and protect their rights. Having observed so, the next logical step in judicial "terrorism" is to threaten officers, including the police to evict the Hawkers at almost all the key locations in the city.

Today, the police brutally removed vendors from Cannaught Place, got the Kalkaji Temple closed and is forcing stoppage of vending in Sarojini Nagar. 

"14.We, therefore, issue a stern warning to both – the officers of the NDMC as well as to the Delhi Police who have jurisdiction over the Connaught Place area, i.e. Rajiv Chowk and Indira Chowk, to ensure strict compliance of not only their scheme approved by the Supreme Court, but also the orders passed by the Supreme Court and by this Court. There should be zero tolerance shown by them, and all hawkers, vendors – except the original 80 odd vendors – as stated by Mr. Peechara, should be removed bag and baggage. The rule of law has to prevail, and we cannot allow the city to be taken over by illegal encroachers/ vendors. Such failure on the part of the respondent authorities in discharging their duties very severely and adversely impacts the rights of the citizens of the city, including their right to life, which includes the right to a healthy and clean environment.

15.We direct the Chairman, NDMC as well as the Executive Engineers of the NDMC having jurisdiction over the Connaught Place area, as well as the DCP of the area concerned and the SHO of the local police station to remain present before us on the next date. Status reports should be filed by the NDMC and the Delhi Police about the steps taken by them-not only to remove the encroachments, but also to ensure that the illegal encroachers and vendors do not return and the area is kept clean on a continuous basis. 

16.The respondent/ NDMC should display permanent boards in the entire Rajiv Chowk and the Indira Chowk areas displaying the fact that the area is a no hawking and no vending zone."

Needless to say none of the provisions of the Act, which was formulated after lot of debates and discussions and going through the parliamentary process has been implemented in the seven years of its existence. Therefore the moot question is whether the judges have the right to provide verdicts which satisfy their orientations and ego or to strictly follow the "rule-of-law" that they themselves allude to in their order.

What a travesty of justice, that the observations of two judges completely undermines the Parliament and the wisdom of eight hundred parliamentarians and places atleast two million peoples lives in quandary. And that too, of those who are trying to atleast make a living post the lockdown. If this festival season is lost in their running around to save themselves, their situation is likely to be as bad as it was during the lockdown.

The order makes a mockery of the Union Government, which has been trying to address the problems of the vendors by instituting programmes like the  PM Svanidhi and other schemes. 

As some vendors fear, if the judges have been swayed by the online e-commerce giants to defy the constitution and act as the legislature, judiciary and executive rolled into one. 

To my mind this is regressive and tantamount to judicial "terrorism".