SAUDAN SINGH AND ORS. ETC. versus N.D.M.C. AND ORS. ETC.

SAUDAN SINGH AND ORS. ETC. versus N.D.M.C. AND ORS. ETC.

The right to street-trading is a facet of Article 19(1)(g) and cannot be denied outright; however, this right is subject to reasonable regulations by the State, and does not confer a right to occupy a specific spot on the pavement permanently. The regulation and identification of genuine hawkers/squatters must be done carefully, by balancing the rights of traders with the needs of pedestrians and public order. The process for scrutinising claims should not be so rigid as to deny justice to genuine claimants, especially where livelihood is involved. Directions for the procedure to review claims, issue public invitations for objections/claims, and regulate future proceedings are provided.

Parties
Petitioner: Saudan Singh and Ors. etc.; Respondent: N.D.M.C. and Ors. etc.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
13 March 1992
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition/special Leave Petition/civil Appeal / Final Disposal by Supreme Court After Referral to Constitution Bench and Remand to Division Bench
Outcome
Writ petitions and civil appeals disposed of with directions. Specific procedures and directions issued for verification, advertisement, and adjudication of claims under NDMC and MCD jurisdictions. No order as to costs.
Legal Topics
Fundamental Rights—article 19(1)(g), Regulation of Street Trading/hawking, Judicial Approaches in Livelihood Cases, Municipal Regulation and Urban Planning
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Fundamental Rights—article 19(1)(g) Regulation of Street Trading/hawking Judicial Approaches in Livelihood Cases Municipal Regulation and Urban Planning

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Saudan Singh and Ors. etc.

Petitioner

N.D.M.C. and Ors. etc.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Writ Petition/special Leave Petition/civil Appeal / Final Disposal by Supreme Court After Referral to Constitution Bench and Remand to Division Bench

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether street-trading is a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and its ambit
  2. 2 Whether squatters/hawkers can claim the right to occupy or squat on specific public street sites permanently
  3. 3 Whether Court should adopt a compassionate approach in matters affecting survival/livelihood of hawkers

Ratio Decidendi

The right to street-trading is a facet of Article 19(1)(g) and cannot be denied outright; however, this right is subject to reasonable regulations by the State, and does not confer a right to occupy a specific spot on the pavement permanently. The regulation and identification of genuine hawkers/squatters must be done carefully, by balancing the rights of traders with the needs of pedestrians and public order. The process for scrutinising claims should not be so rigid as to deny justice to genuine claimants, especially where livelihood is involved. Directions for the procedure to review claims, issue public invitations for objections/claims, and regulate future proceedings are provided.

Court Disposition

Writ petitions and civil appeals disposed of with directions. Specific procedures and directions issued for verification, advertisement, and adjudication of claims under NDMC and MCD jurisdictions. No order as to costs.

Orders

  • Thareja Committee to review rejected claims if further genuine proof is provided.
  • Sarojini Nagar claims to be adjudicated by the Committee with its own criteria.