The Bombay High Court on Friday emphasized the necessity for all street vendors in Maharashtra to possess domicile certificates, asserting that each vendor must be officially recognized by the state government. This decision was made during a suo motu hearing concerning the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) and Mumbai Police’s failure to effectively manage illegal hawking under the provisions of the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014.
The court’s observation came amidst discussions on the challenges faced by the BMC in implementing hawker-related policies, especially due to the absence of elected Town Vending Committees (TVCs). These committees are crucial for regulating street vending but have been difficult to establish and maintain. The BMC held its first-ever TVC elections in August of the previous year, which saw 32,415 registered vendors eligible to vote. However, the Supreme Court has since halted the counting of these votes following disputes over the accuracy of the electoral list, with claims that it should include at least 99,000 hawkers.
During the hearing, the BMC was questioned about the significant decrease in the number of eligible hawkers compared to previous years. The BMC’s counsel explained that the reduction was due to strict adherence to eligibility criteria, which include holding a domicile certificate, being older than 14 years, not having an alternative business source, and possessing Indian citizenship.
The bench, comprising Justices AS Gadkari and Kamal Khata, underscored the importance of domicile certificates to prevent non-residents from conducting unregulated business in the state. “This is important. Otherwise, anyone from different states can come here and conduct their business without being answerable,” the justices noted.
The BMC’s counsel also referenced similar regulations in Delhi, where street vendors must not only hold a domicile certificate but also be listed in the electoral rolls. The court expressed its intention to streamline the process and asked the BMC to outline the challenges it faces in enforcing these rules.
Furthermore, the bench addressed the ongoing issue of illegal vendors who continue to operate despite multiple court orders aimed at their removal. The court reiterated the necessity of designated vending zones and dismissed the arbitrary setup of stalls in the city’s Central Business District.
