Text of Public Notice published in Hindustan Times of 22/05/05

Municipal Corporation of Delhi

PUBLIC NOTICE

The Municipal Corporation of Delhi vide Resolution No.561 dated 25-10-2004 has adopted the National Policy for Urban Street Vendors. According to which, the Zonal Vending Committees & Vending Committee are to be constituted. The process of constitution of the committees is underway. Applications are invited by this public notice from various stakeholders i.e. NGOs, Resident Welfare Associations, representatives of Hawkers’ Union, Traders Associations, Commercial Banks, for being members of the above said committees.

All the interested stakeholders who want to be the member of the Zonal Vending Committee / Ward Vending Committee may submit their application giving name, address, phone number, Municipal Zones of interest, registration particulars, etc, in the office of the undersigned at Central Licensing & Enforcement Cell, Nigam Bhawan, Hindu College Building, Kashmere Gate, within 15 days of the issue of this notice.

Interested organisations / persons may contact over telephone no.23964765 for further clarifications, if any.

Asst Commissioner, Central Licensing & Enforcement Cell, MCD

RO No.121/PIO/2005-06

---

Asst Commissioner, Central Licensing & Enforcement Cell, MCD

Nigam Bhawan, Hindu College Building, Kashmere Gate

Sub: Your Public Notice published in Hindustan Times dated 22/05/2005

Dear Sir,

Your Public Notice under reference invites applications in 15 days from “stakeholders i.e. NGOs, Resident Welfare Associations, representatives of Hawkers’ Union, Traders Associations, Commercial Banks” for being members of Zonal / Ward Vending Committees in “Municipal Zones of interest” since “process of constitution of the committees is underway” pursuant to MCD adopting National Policy on Urban Street Vendors on 25/10/04.

We spoke with your PA at phone no.23964765 mentioned “for further clarifications, if any” at 10:45 AM today but were unable to ascertain (a) statutory provision(s) under which your Notice was issued, (b) modifications with which MCD adopted National Policy, and (c) reason for issuing the Notice on 22/05/05. Your PA mentioned MoUD direction, prior Zonal public-notices, directions to Zonal offices to give preference to disputed cases, etc, but none of this seems available to public. He suggested we visit your office for further clarification. Before that, we seek confirmation of legality and propriety of your Notice with regard to (a) to (c) in terms of the following:

(a) Your Public Notice does not mention the provision(s) of MCD Act under which vending committees are being constituted. Reference in it to Zones / Zonal committees points to s.50 that provides for constitution of a ‘Wards Committee’ in each Zone, but that is composed of elected councilors of wards in the zone and any nominated members registered as electors in it. The “permission, regulation or prohibition of use or occupation of any street or place by itinerant vendors or hawkers or by any person for the sale of articles or the exercise of any calling or the setting up of any booth or stall and the fees chargeable for such occupation” – presumably including by constituting committees – is covered by MCD’s powers to make bye-laws under s.481(E)(5), but that is a legislative task involving procedures set out in s.481A, s.483 and s.484, not reducible to a 15-day Public Notice. Your Public Notice appears to have no basis in MCD Act.

(b) We are also unable to locate the basis of the content of your Public Notice in the National Policy, since the ward-based Town Vending Committee proposed in that (para-4.1.1 and para-4.2) does not call for either ‘zonal’ / expression-of-interest approach or the ‘stakeholder’ array proposed by yourself. Indeed, neither the policy’s Town Vending Committee proposal nor MoUD communications pursuant to policy approval on 20/01/04 (viz, of 19/02/04 from MoS to state Chief Ministers, of 15/06/04 from Joint Secretary UD and of 12/08/04 from Secretary UEPA to Chief Secretaries) suggest preference for administration of the policy, even if adopted for Delhi, through MCD. On the contrary, specific reference in it (para-4.1.2 and Annex-1) to Delhi Master Plan provisions argues for nodal role for DDA (in which all tiers of government are duly represented), in line also with averments made in DDA’s counter-affidavit of 16/01/03 in our WP 6980/2002 (MPISG & Ors v/s DDA & MoUD) to reiterate its reply of 19/10/01 to PMO references and with CVC reference of 10/09/04 (of all of which MCD is seized through prior communications, etc, and our CM No.3447/2005 and submissions/documents of 17/05/05 in WP 2334/2005 (Dharam Singh v/s MCD & Ors)).

(c) We perceive in the timing of your Public Notice impropriety / frustration of constitutional processes. Public Notice is currently out for Delhi Master Plan 2021, inclusive of proposals for informal sector to which MCD is party through representation also on DMP2021 sub-group for Trade & Commerce and your Public Notice seeks to implement something else meanwhile. As per PMO release of 13/05/05 a Task Force has been appointed under Secretary UEPA to evolve viable micro-credit mechanisms for informal sector under SJSRY and vide press notice of 07/05/05 Lok Sabha Standing Committee on Urban Development has called for views for its examination of SJSRY. Your Public Notice, seemingly based only on an unspecified MoUD communication, frustrates those MoUD processes. In our WP 6980/2002 (in which our application for impleading MCD is pending) Hon’ble High Court has directed on 20/04/04 reply under signature of DDA VC and DDA counsel has told us that application for some more time for filing the reply being prepared is being moved perhaps today. In WP 2334/2005 our submissions of 17/05/05 question MCD’s interpretation of National Policy (the Petition, incidentally, includes letter of 23/11/04 from MCD Commissioner and an Office Order of 12/12/04 that mention ward vending committee in relation to the impugned project). Your Public Notice appears also to frustrate questions pending consideration of the Hon’ble Court.

Gita Dewan Verma, MPISG Planner

To support planned development. To oppose unplanned development. To protect our future.