The Bombay High Court has refused to grant any protective orders for hawkers operating illegally in Mumbai, taking a firm stance on the issue. The decision came during a hearing on a suo motu petition aimed at addressing the ongoing problem of unauthorised hawking in the city.
The division bench, consisting of Justice S M Sonak and Justice Kamal Khata, categorically stated that it would not provide any protection to the hawkers, highlighting the court’s intention to tackle the issue comprehensively. While refusing any form of protective relief, the bench proposed exploring alternative measures to manage the hawking situation. “Consider designating some other areas; we need to evaluate if a new model can be effective in curbing illegal hawking. Our focus is currently on the larger issue,” the court suggested. The judges emphasised that they were taking a step-by-step approach to deal with the broader challenge of unauthorised street vending.
The hearing also delved into procedural complications that have hindered regulatory efforts. The Bombay Municipal Corporation (BMC) pointed out that the Supreme Court’s directives regarding the Town Vending Committee elections have created legal hurdles. The counsel for BMC explained that, without the formation of the committee, neither the civic body nor the state government could develop a comprehensive regulatory framework for hawking activities. Justice Khata expressed concern over the enforcement challenges, questioning what recourse shopkeepers have if their complaints about obstructive hawkers are not addressed by the authorities.
This observation underscored the frustrations faced by shop owners who regularly contend with encroachments by hawkers that disrupt their businesses. Petitioners echoed these grievances, arguing that despite numerous complaints, the BMC and the police have not adequately acted against illegal hawking. The BMC’s counsel contended that the civic body is actively engaged in cracking down on illegal hawking by seizing goods and monitoring high-activity areas. However, the court noted that the Town Vending Committee elections, which were mandated by an earlier order, have not been finalised due to a stay by the Supreme Court. This delay, the BMC noted, prevents the implementation of a regulatory scheme by the earlier deadline of 20th September.
A petitioner suggested establishing a dedicated task force to address the issue, with the authority to take swift action against illegal hawking within a 30-minute response window to citizen complaints. However, Justice Sonak cautioned against issuing multiple directives, warning that it might create additional confusion and reduce effectiveness. The bench stressed the need for a focused approach to tackle the issue in a structured and phased manner, aiming to find a sustainable solution to the illegal hawking crisis.
