HC refuses to stay orders on hawkers’ menace

Court says areas marked as non-hawking zones are sacrosanct

The Bombay High Court on Friday once again clarified that it would not allow any hawker to conduct business in non-hawking zones. This is a setback to lakhs of hawkers across Maharashtra, who had sought a stay on the HC’s judgement, delivered earlier this week.

The hawkers’ union had moved the division bench of Justice Bhushan Gavai and Justice Makarand Karnik, urging the judges to stay their judgement. The judges had on Wednesday prohibited hawkers from conducting their business in non-hawking zones across the State.

The judges had also imposed certain restrictions on the hawkers confining their activities to 100 meters away from religious places, hospitals and educational institutes.

The judges had also asked the hawkers not to carry out their vending activities within 150 meters of railway stations, market places and municipal corporations.

Being aggrieved by the ruling, the hawkers had again approached the judges seeking a stay on their orders. The hawkers sought stay so that they could challenge the orders in the Supreme Court and in the meantime, they are not prohibited from carrying out their business.

According to senior counsel Anil Sakhare, representing the BMC, “Justice Gavai refused to grant a stay on his judgement saying that his orders were clear. He also referred to the judgement wherein the bench had considered the fact that a Town Vending Committee was constituted in May 2014, which had representatives of the hawkers and also that the contentions of the unions were duly considered.”

The judges had in their judgement said if they accept the contention of the hawkers that they are free to do hawking anywhere in the city, then there will be chaos in the city and everyone would be in a limbo.

The judgment reads, “There will be no regulations to regulate the business of hawking. The Authorities will be powerless to take action against the hawkers, even if the business of hawking causes threat to free-flow of traffic and also causes threat to the security of citizens.”

Th ere will be no regulations to regulate the business of hawking. The authorities will be powerless to take action against the hawkers, even if the business of hawking causes threat to free-flow of traffic and also causes threat to the security of citizens

—HIGH COURT