6 days ago
Calcutta High Court Says Vendors Act Doesn’t Shield Street Encroachments
Hawkers in Kolkata asked the court to stop an eviction drive.
They said selling goods was their only way to earn a living.
They also said the Street Vendors Act protected them.
The Kolkata Municipal Corporation said it was removing encroachments from footpaths.
The court said the law protects authorized vending in proper vending zones.
It does not protect illegal buildings or permanent structures on public streets.
The court was unsure whether all the petitioners were authorized vendors.
It dismissed their petition and allowed the civic action to continue.
Some hawkers with carts that cannot be moved immediately may get extra time to make them movable.
The Calcutta High Court dismissed a petition challenging the Kolkata Municipal Corporation’s eviction notice.
The court said the Street Vendors Act protects lawful vending in vending zones, not unauthorized construction or encroachments.
Hawkers’ associations argued that vending was their only livelihood and invoked constitutional protections.
The Kolkata Municipal Corporation said its action targeted permanent footpath encroachments, not lawful vending.
The court noted that movable carts could receive additional time to comply with the Street Vendors Act.
- Who
- Tangra Dhapa Hawkers Samiti and other hawkers’ associations challenged action by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation before the Calcutta High Court.
- What
- The court dismissed their challenge to an eviction notice and clarified the limits of protection under the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014.
- Where
- Dhapa Road and surrounding localities in Kolkata.
- When
- The eviction notice was issued on August 3, 2026; a relevant Kolkata Town Vending Committee meeting took place on June 27.
- Why
- The Kolkata Municipal Corporation sought to remove footpath encroachments and unauthorized constructions, while the hawkers claimed protection for their livelihoods and vending rights.
Hawkers’ Associations
Kolkata Municipal Corporation and Court
Protection under the law
Hawkers’ Associations
The hawkers argued that their vending was their only source of livelihood and that they were protected by the Street Vendors Act and Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.
Kolkata Municipal Corporation and Court
The court said the Act protects the right to conduct vending activities in a vending zone and protection against eviction in certain cases, but not illegal or unauthorized construction.
No-vending zone notification
Hawkers’ Associations
The hawkers’ groups said the civic authorities had not notified which areas were designated as no-vending zones.
Kolkata Municipal Corporation and Court
The Kolkata Municipal Corporation argued that its anti-encroachment action targeted footpath encroachments rather than lawful vending.
Authorization and structures
Hawkers’ Associations
The petitioners described themselves as street vendors and challenged the eviction notice affecting their operations along Dhapa Road and nearby areas.
Kolkata Municipal Corporation and Court
The court said it was unclear whether they were authorized street vendors and noted that the KMC sought to remove encroachments with some degree of permanence.
Key facts
- Court
- Calcutta High Court
- Judge
- Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury
- Civic body
- Kolkata Municipal Corporation
- Challenged action
- Eviction notice issued on August 3, 2026
- Law at issue
- Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014
- Court’s finding
- The Act protects vending in vending zones, but not unauthorized construction or encroachments
- Compliance measure
- Some hawkers with currently immovable carts may receive additional time to make them movable
Quotes
Calcutta High Court
The court that issued the ruling on the hawkers’ eviction challenge.
“What is protected under the said Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014, is the right to carry on vending activities that too in a vending zone, and the right against eviction in certain cases,”
thestatesman.com
“Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014, does not protect illegal and unauthorized construction,”
thestatesman.com
Sources
Related news
Karnataka HC stays FIR against Mangaluru vendors’ leader, questions govt
Kolkata TVC mulls deputation to CM over anti-encroachment drive
Shimla vendors protest eviction drive, demand Street Vendors Act implementation
Kolkata Hawker Evictions Renew Livelihood Versus Public Access Debate
Shimla street vendors protest eviction drive, demand designated vending zones
Visakhapatnam Vendors Protest GVMC Action Under Operation Lungs
