Bombay High Court
PALIMA RAJENDRA KONDAR TATA NAGAR ZOPADPATTI AND ORSversusDEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The State must promptly finalize and notify the Street Vendors Scheme, constitute functional Grievance Redressal Committees in all local bodies, provide requisite infrastructure, and issue guidelines for seizure‑and‑reclamation, thereby complying with the statutory obligations of the 2014 Act.
Summary
The petitioners sought mandamus to compel the State of Maharashtra to implement the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014, specifically the formulation of a State‑wide scheme under Section 38, the constitution of Grievance Redressal Committees under Section 20, and compliance with seizure‑and‑reclamation procedures under Section 19. The Court noted that despite earlier directions, the State had not finalized a scheme and many local bodies lacked properly constituted committees or requisite infrastructure. The Court directed the Government to finalize and notify the draft scheme, to ensure all urban local bodies form Grievance Redressal Committees within six weeks, and to provide staff, office space and remuneration as required by the 2016 Rules. It also ordered the publication of Town Vending Committee notifications for seven corporations and mandated the Regional Director to issue guidelines for the return of seized goods within two weeks. Finally, the Court disposed of the writ petitions, noting compliance with its directions will be monitored.
Issues considered
- Whether the State of Maharashtra has complied with its statutory duty under Section 38 of the Street Vendors Act to formulate and notify a State‑wide scheme.
- Whether the Grievance Redressal Committees mandated by Section 20 have been properly constituted across all urban local bodies.
- Whether the infrastructure and staffing requirements under the Maharashtra Street Vendors Rules, 2016 have been fulfilled.
- Whether the procedures for seizure and reclamation of vendors' goods under Section 19 are being followed pending finalization of the scheme.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- Street Vendors Act
- Scheme formulation
- Grievance Redressal Committee
- Section 19 seizure
- Section 20 redressal
- Section 38 scheme
- Maharashtra
- Mandamus
- Urban local bodies
Judgment
NISHA Digitally signed by
NISHA SANDEEP
SANDEEP CHITNIS
Date: 2026.09.07
CHITNIS 16:28:16 +0530 S- 15-wp.3890.2021&3665.2022w.ia 90.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.3890 OF 2021
Palima Rajendra Kondar
Tata Nagar Zopadpatti and Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
Deputy Commissioner and Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3371 OF 2026
(FOR INTERVENTION)
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.3890 OF 2021
Sayyed Mastan Fakira ...Applicant
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN:-
Palima Rajendra Kondar
Tata Nagar Zopadpatti and Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
Deputy Commissioner and Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.3665 OF 2022
Maharashtra Hawkers Federation ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Maharashtra and Anr. ...Respondents
Mr. Kranti L. C. i/b Mr. Kaustubh Gidh for the Petitioners.
Mr. Tejesh Dande with Mr. Bharat Gadhavi and Mr. Satyajeet Salve,
for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3.
Mr. Savita Prabhune, A.G.P. for the Respondent-State.
N. S. Chitnis 1/16
S- 15-wp.3890.2021&3665.2022w.ia 90.doc
Mr. Avinash Naik, Assistant (Taxation and Administrative Officer),
Urban Development Department, is present.
CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE &
ASHISH S. CHAVAN, JJ.
rd
DATE : 3 SEPTEMBER 2026
P.C. :
1. The two writ petitions before us involve the
implementation of the provisions of the Street Vendors (Protection of
Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014 (‘Act of
2014’). Despite the statute having been in force, and the Hon’ble
Apex Court as well as this Court by their judgments issuing directions
from time to time for implementation of the provisions of the Act, a
grievance was specifically raised that, as far as the State of Maharashtra
is concerned, the scheme which is contemplated to be formulated
under Section 38 and specifically directed by the judgment delivered in
the case of Azad Hawkers Union and Others vs. Union of India and
Others (Writ Petition No.652 of 2017), the scheme was not
formulated.
Upon this aspect being brought to our notice, and a
mandamus being sought in the petitions to strictly implement the
N. S. Chitnis 2/16
S- 15-wp.3890.2021&3665.2022w.ia 90.doc
provisions of the Act, we issued directions from time to time. One of
the grievance of the petitioners was also about formulation of the
mechanism for redressal of grievances of street vendors as per Chapter
V, Section 20 of the Act of 2014. One more grievance to which our
attention was invited was about the procedure to be followed for
seizure and reclamation of goods, as it was contended before us by the
counsel for the petitioners that great injustice was caused to the
vendors by not strictly adhering to the procedure prescribed under
Section 19 and in the absence of a mechanism being in place for
resolution of the disputes of street vendors, as the Grievance Redressal
Committees were not constituted under Section 20, the hawkers found
themselves in a helpless situation.
2. Taking cognizance of the grievance raised and on hearing
the submissions advanced before us, through various orders, we sought
the follow-up of the implementation of the provisions of the Act and
we recorded that the State Government has not yet come up with the
scheme, and we were informed that the steps were taken, but finally it
N. S. Chitnis 3/16
S- 15-wp.3890.2021&3665.2022w.ia 90.doc
did not culminate into a scheme, as the scheme formulated in the year
2017 was disapproved by this Court in Writ Petition No. 652 of 2017,
as a result, no scheme was operating in the State of Maharashtra. On
20th April 2026, we were informed that the Government had issued a
Resolution in reference to the order passed by us and the Government
resolved to constitute a committee under the chairmanship of the
Commissioner-cum-Director, Municipal Administration Mumbai, with
the Deputy Commissioner, Municipal Administration as its Member
Secretary, and several other officials, including Commissioners/Deputy
Commissioners of various Municipal Corporations, as its members.
The Government Resolution fixed the timelines for
preparation of the scheme under Section 38 and we were also
informed that a draft scheme is already prepared, but before it took a
final shape, it contemplated the involvement of Urban Local Bodies, in
which the process of establishing a nominated Street Vendor
Committee conducting a street vendor survey under the supervision
was an obstacle, as either the committees were not in place as they
were not constituted, or the elections were in process. The
N. S. Chitnis 4/16
S- 15-wp.3890.2021&3665.2022w.ia 90.doc
Government Resolution also contemplated that after this whole
exercise is completed, the draft Street Vendors Scheme shall be placed
before the committee for its suggestions, and thereafter only will the
Government be able to finalize its draft scheme to be made applicable
throughout the State of Maharashtra. The Government Resolution also
contemplated that if no objections and suggestions are received from
the concerned local authority and the City Street Vendor Committee,
within the period that would be prescribed, inviting objections of the
draft vending scheme, then it shall be considered that the committee
has accepted the scheme.
The Resolution also contemplated that if some suggestions
and objections are received, the said committee constituted by the
Government Resolution shall have due consideration of the same
within a period of one month and submit it to the Government for
approval of Notification and thereafter, the scheme for street vendors
under Section 38, to be applicable throughout the State of
Maharashtra, shall be notified.
N. S. Chitnis 5/16
S- 15-wp.3890.2021&3665.2022w.ia 90.doc
3. From the date of passing of the Resolution, when the
petitions appeared before us from time to time, we issued various
directions and one main issue which warranted our consideration was
the constitution of the Dispute Redressal Committee, as contemplated
under Section 20 and by issuing specific directions, we called upon the
Government to take the issue seriously, as in absence of the mechanism
being prescribed for resolution of the disputes of the vendors, they
were finding it difficult to carry out vending activities, and as a result
they were required to approach various associations but no redressal
could be provided of their grievance.
In the wake of our directions issued on 27 th July 2026,
when we specifically directed the Urban Development Department to
take immediate steps for constitution of the said committees and
report compliance, the Joint Secretary of the Urban Development
Department, through her affidavit affirmed on 2 nd September 2026,
has made a statement that as on 2nd September 2026, out of 424
Urban Local Bodies, 325 have formed Grievance Redressal
Committees, as contemplated under Section 20 of the Act of 2014.
N. S. Chitnis 6/16
S- 15-wp.3890.2021&3665.2022w.ia 90.doc
The affidavit is also accompanied by a Chart providing the details of
the committees that have been constituted.
Ms. Prabhune, the learned Government Advocate
representing the respondent, however, makes a statement that as on
date i.e. when the matters are being heard by this Court, committees
have been constituted for 355 local bodies.
4. The difficulty expressed by her and which is specifically
highlighted in the affidavit, is in respect of such local bodies where a
person who has been a Civil Judge or a Judicial Magistrate who is to
be appointed as a Chairman of the committee is not available and she
submits that such difficulty being faced in Manchar, District Pune, a
committee has been constituted which is headed by the Chief Officer
of the Municipal Council. But, we disapprove of such a committee, as
it is not constituted in terms of Section 20. Furthermore, we note that
if an appeal is to be filed against the decision of such a committee,
which would again lie to the Municipal Council, it would render the
remedy of appeal a mere formality. We quite appreciate that the State
N. S. Chitnis 7/16
S- 15-wp.3890.2021&3665.2022w.ia 90.doc
Government, pursuant to our directions, has constituted such
committees for redressal of grievances, but in places where a Civil
Judge or Judicial Magistrate of that particular area/Municipal Council
is not available and therefore the District Judge has not made
recommendation, we direct that it is open for the District Judge to
recommend a person who had been a Civil Judge or Judicial
Magistrate from another Municipal area or adjoining area as
chairmanship of the Grievance Redressal Committee is not
jurisdiction-wise, therefore, even a person residing outside the said
locality can be appointed as Chairman.
We, therefore, expect that with this clarification being
offered and communicated to the District Judges of the respective
areas where the negative response has been received that no Civil
Judge or Judicial Magistrate is available for being appointed, we
expect that the State Government shall complete the process of
constitution of Grievance Redressal Committees in all the local bodies
within a period of six weeks from today.
N. S. Chitnis 8/16
S- 15-wp.3890.2021&3665.2022w.ia 90.doc
5. On the committees being constituted now at the local level,
itself is not sufficient, as it is necessary for the State Government to
provide the necessary infrastructure so as to make these committees
functional as Section 20 prescribe a complete mechanism for redressal
of a grievance, and the committee is expected to conduct an inquiry
and then take steps for redressal of the grievance or resolution of a
dispute. This necessarily involves providing of infrastructure and our
attention is invited to the Maharashtra Street Vendors (Protection of
Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) (Maharashtra) Rules,
2016. Chapter II of the said Rules provides for the Dispute Redressal
Mechanism, and Sub-rule (4) of Rule 5 of the Rules of 2017 casts an
obligation upon the local authority to provide staff, office space, and
other necessary amenities to the Grievance Redressal and Dispute
Resolution Committee. We, therefore, direct the State Government to
issue a directive to all the local bodies for making such necessary
provision of staff, office space, and other necessary amenities so that
the committees constituted by the local bodies can function in an
effective manner. When we say that the necessary infrastructure shall
N. S. Chitnis 9/16
S- 15-wp.3890.2021&3665.2022w.ia 90.doc
be provided, it shall definitely include payment of remuneration/salary
to the staff and we direct that the State Government shall do the
needful by creating a staffing pattern with a provision for salaries to be
paid either by the State Government or by the local authorities.
6. As far as the draft scheme for street vendors which was
prepared, the affidavit filed by the Joint Secretary, Urban Development
Department, in paragraph 4 has stated thus:
“4. I say that as far as the Street Vendors Scheme is
concerned, the Government has approved the Draft Street
Vendors Scheme which was finalized by the Street Vendors
Scheme Drafting Committee that was constituted as per the
Government Resolution dated 20.04.2026. The said Draft
Street Vendors Scheme is now sent to all urban local bodies
as per the Order of this Hon'ble Court dt.30.04.2026.
Hereto annexed and marked as Exhibit R4 is the copy of
the letter sent to all urban local bodies.”
7. We are also informed that the draft scheme has been
circulated to the Municipal Corporations/Municipal Councils, so that
the Town Vending Committees (‘TVC’) are in a position to raise their
objections and a timeline of two months has been specified for
objections to be raised. As the Government Resolution itself clarified,
N. S. Chitnis 10/16
S- 15-wp.3890.2021&3665.2022w.ia 90.doc
if no objections are received within a period of two months, it shall be
taken that the TVC has no objection for finalizing the draft scheme
and notifying the same. However, in case if any objections are
received, in terms of the Government Resolution dated 20 th April
2026, the committee constituted under the said Resolution shall
scrutinize the objections and suggestions and forward them to the State
Government. We expect the said exercise to be completed within a
period of two months from the last date of receipt of objections and
this gives a clear period of two months for the committee to scrutinize
the objections and forward it to the State Government. However, on
expiry of period of two months (two months for objections plus two
months for scrutiny of the objections and placing it before the State
Government), we direct the State Government to notify the scheme for
street vendors for the State Government as contemplated under
Section 38 and the Scheme shall then come into force and shall govern
the vending activities in the State of Maharashtra.
N. S. Chitnis 11/16
S- 15-wp.3890.2021&3665.2022w.ia 90.doc
8. Mr. Kranti, learned counsel for the petitioners has invited
our attention to one important factum being that as far as seven
Corporations are concerned, viz. Panvel, Kolhapur, Pimpri-
Chinchwad, Parbhani, Satara, Kalyan-Dombivali and Navi Mumbai,
the elections for TVC are conducted and the results are declared but
the Notification constituting TVC is still pending at the end of the
Urban Development Department.
This statement is not disputed at the end of the State
Government and therefore, we direct that in respect of all the seven
Corporations, the Notification constituting TVC shall be published
within a period of two weeks from today.
We also make it clear that if elections for constitution of
TVC in other Municipal Corporation/Municipal Council is conducted
and the result is declared then the Notification constituting TVC shall
be published. In other Municipal Corporation/Municipal Council
where the process of election is still on-going in continuation of our
earlier directions, as per the commitment made before us that the
elections shall be concluded within the time bound manner, we direct
N. S. Chitnis 12/16
S- 15-wp.3890.2021&3665.2022w.ia 90.doc
that the Urban Development Department shall ensure that the
Notification constituting TVC in every Municipal
Corporation/Municipal Council is published so that every TVC get a
right for forwarding its comments/objections in respect of the draft
Street Vendors Scheme. In any case we had clearly expressed in our
order that if for some reason, elections for any Municipal
Corporation/Municipal Council/Local Body, the TVC is not
constituted that will not be an impediment in not finalizing the Street
Vendor Scheme of which the draft is circulated.
9. Another point of grave significance which warrants our
consideration is the provision for seizure and reclaiming of goods as
contemplated under Section 19 of the Act of 2014. We must note that
Second Schedule, providing for the matters to be included in the
scheme for street vendors framed by the appropriate Government also
make it imperative to provide for the manner of reclaiming seized
goods by the street vendor and the fees for the same.
A perusal of the draft scheme would reveal that this aspect
N. S. Chitnis 13/16
S- 15-wp.3890.2021&3665.2022w.ia 90.doc
has received due consideration in the draft scheme but the issue raised
by the learned counsel for the petitioners definitely is of significance
and which deserves consideration, is pending the finalization of the
scheme and till the time when it comes into effect by it being notified
by the State Government after following the rigmarole which we had
set out in the order, till that time if some vendor’s goods are seized, the
procedure for its return depending upon the nature of the goods
(perishable/non-perishable) as directed in Section 19 shall be strictly
adhered to. Though, this forms part of the draft scheme, till the Street
Vendors Scheme becomes applicable in the State of Maharashtra, we
expect the Regional Director of Municipal Administration to issue a
Circular/Guidelines, directing the local bodies to deal with the goods
which are seized and their release, as contemplated under Section 19
of the Act of 2014 by following the procedure prescribed therein,
awaiting the final procedure for seizure and reclamation of goods as
provided in the draft scheme which is under consideration of the State
Government. We expect this compliance to be done forthwith and in
no case later than two weeks from today.
N. S. Chitnis 14/16
S- 15-wp.3890.2021&3665.2022w.ia 90.doc
10. At this stage, we must only observe that the long drawn
process of the petitioners seeking relief from this Court in the form
of formulating the street vendors scheme, which should be uniformly
applicable throughout the State of Maharashtra on the basis of the
schemes that are already formulated in different States like the State
of NCT of Delhi and Karnataka, now appear to be in sight.
We can only record our appreciation for the petitioners who have
taken up the issue in all its seriousness as we find that down the line
on passage of more than a decade, the State of Maharashtra did
not formulate a Scheme which was a statutory mandate of Act of
2014 and once when that attempt failed in the year 2017, probably
the State Government had lost sight of the fact that it had to
formulate such a Scheme. In any way, according to us, it is never
late, if at all. Now we feel that the State Government has taken
appropriate steps and we see the finalization of the draft scheme in a
short while from now and though we dispose of the writ
petitions, we deem it appropriate to place the same before us
N. S. Chitnis 15/16
S- 15-wp.3890.2021&3665.2022w.ia 90.doc
for compliance by listing the petitions on 1st December 2026.
Pending Interim Application also stands disposed of.
ASHISH S. CHAVAN, J. BHARATI DANGRE, J.
N. S. Chitnis 16/16
Checking your session…