This article is written by Abinaya R M.

Introduction

This article is an attempt to understand the problems faced by street vendors and also the rights available to them. While many people consider them as nuisance and are indulged in finding reasons to evict them off, this paper deals with the day-to-day challenges which those vendors face in order to have livelihood. Street vendors refer to those people who sell goods right from fresh vegetables to cheap household utensils. On one side, the urban people think that they are the reason for crowded pavement, on the other side, we have to look into the situations which obliged them to choose that business. In 2014, the Street Vendors (Protection of Street Vending) Act was enacted. Only after that, the street vendors have been recognised to some extent and certain rights were granted to them for the protection of their livelihood. But also, this Act has some ambiguity. This article deals with the rights and obligation of the street vendors position in India and also the issues regarding the provisions of this Act.

Poverty and lack of employment in rural areas drive people to the urban areas for survival and livelihood. These people usually have low skills and have less qualification for the better jobs in organised sector. And moreover, people in organized sectors too are struggling to have their employment to be placed permanently on that sector. Few people choose street vending. They try to overcome these problems by means of starting their own enterprise. They didn’t opt for stealing or indulge in some other criminal activities or begging. All they need is to live their life with dignity.

Street vendors form a very important segment of an unorganized sector in the country. It is estimated that in several cities’ street vendors counts for more than 2% of the population of that city. Women constitute a large segment of the street vendors in almost every city. According to a survey Uttar Pradesh tops in the number of street vendors by having a total of 7.8 lakh, it was followed by West Bengal with 5.5 lakh street vendors.

Street vending cannot be considered only a source of self-employment to the poor people in cities and towns but also a means to provide affordable as well as convenient services to a majority of the urban population. Even though many of them where local people there were also people who come from far places like China, Tibet, etc. In most cities, the civic authorities treat them as nuisance. On the other hand, the poor working people consider street vendors as a boon because these vendors provide goods at a very cheap rate. The issues regarding the legality of street vending have bothered those people for long.

Categories of street vendors

Broadly stating, street vendors can be defined as the person who offers the sale of goods and services without a permanent built-up structure. The Government of India has categorised vending under the three heads. They are:

• Stationery vendors;
• Peripatetic vendors;
• Mobile vendors.

Stationery vendors are those vendors who carry out vending activity on a regular basis at a specific location, with explicit or implicit consent of the civic or local authorities. Usually, they carry their business in a vehicle or an establishment that is not permanently attached to the real property (may be in a public or private owned property but not on public street and sidewalks). Peripatetic vendors are those categories of vendors who carry out vending through foot which is by way of carrying baskets on their shoulders, etc. Whereas mobile vendors move from place to place vending their goods and services on bicycles or motorized vehicles.

Position of street vendors

Since ancient times, street vendors have been prevalent in our country. Street vendors are to a great extent regarded as public nuisance by middle and upper-middle-class people who aggressively demand restoration of pavements. These vendors form an integral part of the urban distribution system by providing easy access to many goods like vegetables, foods, etc., but in return face humiliation, harassment and threats from police officers and inspectors from local governing bodies. Municipal authorities frequently demand bribes from these vendors.

As the street vendors spend majority of their working time in open road, they are vulnerable to different types of disease like hyperacidity, hypertension, tuberculosis, high blood pressure, etc. The lack of toilet facilities has an adverse effect on women’s health and they suffer from urinary infection and kidney ailments.

Provisions under the Indian Constitution

Many people consider them as encroachers of pavement. But actually, they are not against the development. What they demand is an alternate space to earn and to have their own livelihood. Indian Constitution as a social document aims at promoting justice, equality, liberty and fraternity as mentioned in the Preamble itself. Many provisions in the Indian Constitution were quoted in the litigation in order to stress the rights of street vendors. They are

• Article 14: Equality before law and equal protection;
• Article 19(1)(g): Freedom to practice any profession;
• Article 21: Protection against the deprivation of life and personal liberty.

Policy measures and guidelines

Recognition of street vendors has gained the attention at the international level. Bellagio International Declaration of Street Vendors, 1995 stressed the importance of formulation of national policy for hawkers and vendors at the global level. It was made to improve their standard of living by giving them a legal status through licensing, promotion of self-regulation, access to legal system and credit facilities, etc. Hawkers and vendors are often used as synonymous, but actually hawkers refer to persons carrying street trade by moving from one place to another. Vending is another street trade which is done by vendors by occupying a space in pavement. In India, this declaration has served as a base for many subsequent policies relating to Street vending.

The Supreme Court, in the case Bombay Hawkers Union v. BMC & Others, for the first time upheld the right to livelihood of the street vendors and went on to observe that unreasonable restrictions and conditions cannot be imposed on street vendors. In Gainda Ram v. MCD, the Supreme Court observed that the fundamental right of hawkers, just because they are poor and unorganized cannot be left in a state of limbo nor it can leave completely to be decided by the varying standards of a scheme which changes from time to time under the orders of the Court.

In South Calcutta Hawkers Association v. Government of West Bengal, the high court of Calcutta observed that street vending being a fundamental right has to be made available to all the citizens subject to Article 19(6) of the Constitution. It is within the sphere of the State to impose any kind of restrictions to regulate the same. Regulations has to be made, otherwise it will destroy the very purpose of laying roads.

In Sodan Singh v. NDMC, the Supreme Court issued guidelines to be followed by civic authorities till proper legislation could be brought into force. However, the implementation of these guidelines has become subject of various litigations before various High Courts and Supreme Court. Later on, in Maharashtra Ekta Hawkers Union v. MCGM, the Supreme Court was forced to revisit the guidelines.

National Association of Street Vendors in India was registered in 2003. The main idea behind this is to conduct surveys in many areas to study about vendors and to tackle their problems.

Again, various street vendors organisation has been forced to knock on the doors of the highest court of the country to seek enforcement of their basic fundamental rights. The effect is the introduction of a system called License Raj (system of issuing license). The main idea behind licensing is to prevent illegitimate business which can be done in the name of street vending. Census can also be made by having a look at the records. The main backlog in the system of licensing is the mass harassment faced by the street vendors by the authorities who often force them to vacate a particular area and also another drawback is bribe.

After various Supreme Court and High Court judgements, the first attempt to consolidate street vending to the legislation was made on 2004. National Urban Street Vendors Policy was formulated by the Central Government. Then in 2009, it was revised and a Model Bill was drafted. The National Urban Street Vendors Policy, 2009 was the revised version of the Bellagio Declaration. As per this Policy, every street vendor will be able to carry out the business for 20 years. Soon after that, the States demanded for the enactment of a permanent legislation on the subject. In this context, the Street Vendors Bill, 2012 was prepared. After getting assent it becomes an Act in 2014.

Provisions of the Act

The Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014 deals with the rights and obligations of the street vendors. The term street vendors have been defined under this Act. Section 2(l) defines street vendor as any person engaged in vending of articles, goods, food, etc. or offering services to the general public in a street lane, sidewalk, footpath, pavement, public part, or any other public or private area. It includes hawkers, peddlers and squatters.

Any street vendor who is above the age of 14 has to register with the Town Vending Committee and they will issue an identity card. The local authorities shall revise the street vending plans once in every 5 year. They can even transfer or relocate a vendor in case of public nuisance. But he shall be provided a new site for vending purpose. Provisions for credit insurance and welfare schemes were also included in this Act.

Section 14, Section 15, Section 16 and Section 17 lays down certain duties to be followed by street vendors. Section 14 says that where a street occupies a particular vending place in a time-sharing basis, he shall remove the wares and goods every day at the end of that specified time. Section 15 mandates every street vendor to maintain hygiene and cleanliness. This section consists of ambiguous provisions and it paves way for many authorities to harass them based on this. Because it didn’t clearly mention as to what would constitute cleanliness and personal hygiene. As per Section 16, every street vendor has the duty to maintain public property in a good condition and should not cause any damage or destruction to it. Section 17 of this Act imposes a monetary burden to street vendors. It obligates a street vendor to pay a periodic maintenance charge to the civic amenities.

Issues

Due to the ambiguity in the existing Act, street vendors suffer from various harassments. Few of the issues of this Act are as follows:

• Many States didn’t even adopt this Act to the fullest form. 
• Police use public nuisance as a reason to evict these vendors, but the word public nuisance has not been defined under this Act.
• The jurisdiction of the Parliament to frame rules regarding this subject is itself a matter for dispute as the subject matter falls on item 5 of the state list.
• Section 5 of the Act provides that, if a street vendor goes for seeking certificate, he needs to prove that he doesn’t have any other means for his livelihood. This will be really odd for those people because street vending cannot be treated as highly paying profession. So, in order to have a better livelihood, street vendors have to do other things simultaneously.
• This Act provides for penalty for the breach of terms and conditions of the scheme. But it does not distinguish between minor and major breach. As the result, the penalty burden will be the same in all cases.
• In case, if the street vendors exceed 2.5 per cent of the total local population, then he won’t be provided with a vending certificate unless they are relocated in any adjoining place. In that case, he cannot seek dispute redressing mechanism.

Conclusion

As per the report of the Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation, there are more than 10 million street vendors in India. Poverty and unemployment push these people from rural to urban areas. A study conducted in Mumbai revealed that the per capita income of 53% of street vendors were Rs. 20 per day. It itself clearly portrays the day-to-day basis and the problems of street vendors. On one hand, the Act seems to do little justice to the street vendors by accepting and recognising them. But on the other hand, it imposes many restrictions regarding compulsory registration, no vending zone and penalties for non-compliance with the terms and conditions. The rights that are granted under this Act and the way they are interpreted almost make it impossible to be implemented. So, a change has to be made in such a way to grant more rights and to lessen the obligations.

Though the Government has introduced some measures to promote the livelihood of the street vendors and hawkers, many people tend to live in the same struggled life due to the lack of awareness about these schemes.

No person can live or lead his life without a means of livelihood. As right to life is a part of the fundamental right under the Constitution, right to livelihood should also be treated in par with it. If not, one of the easiest ways to deprive a person of his right to life will be livelihood. The bad thing here to be realised is that we people won’t bargain to people who have everything but we do it to those people who don’t even know what or whether they will be eating tonight.

References

• http://www.legalserviceindia.com/articles/Legal_Rights_Street_Traders_India.htm#:~:text=The%20right%20to%20life%20includes,is%20the%20means%20of%20livelihood.
• https://www.wiego.org/sites/default/files/resources/files/Street%20Vendors%E2%80%99%20Laws%20and%20Legal%20Issues%20in%20India.pdf
• https://prsindia.org/billtrack/the-street-vendors-protection-of-livelihood-and-regulation-of-street-vending-bill-2012

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join: