Meghalaya HC directs Govt to demarcate administrative areas in relation to traffic movement
The Meghalaya High Court on Monday directed the Principal Secretary in-charge Urban Affairs department to demarcate administrative areas in relation to traffic movement and constitute a committee to specify areas where street vending is permitted by law.
“The Principal Secretary, Urban Affairs Department is directed to demarcate administrative areas in relation to traffic movement. For each of these areas, he should constitute a committee comprising of authorities responsible for regulation of traffic. A timeline should be set for creation of this committee.
The primary task of the committee for each of the areas should be to specify the areas where street vending is permitted by law,” the Court said in its order passed after hearing a PIL.
It also directed that the committee should make an inventory of the vendors who were authorised to vend their goods in these authorised areas.
“It should also ascertain whether those who have been authorised are actually vending there or have sublet or parted with possession of those locations to third parties who are operating without licence or aut horisation. Thereafter, areas which are not authorised to be used for vending should be carefully identified and demarcated. Thereafter on visit and inspection of sites, a detailed inventory should be made of persons who are vending in those unauthorised areas without licence,” the Court said.
“The report should also contain a statement in some detail as to the extent or percentage of the road surface occupied by unauthorised vendors and the extent to which it is interfering with the traffic movement,” it also added.
Further, the court has directed the report should positively be filed by 28th February, 2025.
The Court also noted that the PIL concerns the great interference to traffic movement, traffic disruptions, traffic jam and lack of parking space caused by shops set up by street vendors.
“We have considered the explanation offered by K Khan, AAG, for the continuing delay in the submission of the report of the State government in compliance with the earlier orders passed in this matter. We grant the government time till 6 th January, 2025 peremptorily to comply with the order of this Court dated 14 th May, 2024,” it said adding “In addition to or in clarification of the materials data, policy, plan of action and timelines proposed to be included in the report, we make the following observations which should be considered and included at the time of preparation of the final report.”
The court observed that more than one administrative authority is in charge of regulation of traffic movement in a district.
“Say for example, in a substantial part of Shillong which is described as the European part, traffic is regulated by the Municipal authority and the police, the police being responsible for management of traffic whereas, the Municipality indirectly regulates the area for movement of traffic by granting licenses for conduct of street business. Similarly, there are more than one authority in other areas including the districts,” it stated further.
Facebook
Instagram
Youtube
Twitter
There are 2 dimension which could be studied, such as :-
a. The extent of the free area for the movement of vehicles and pedestrians; which get compromised due to the presence of individual vendors and vendor groups in critical choke points ,
b.The Accidental threat to vendors and pedestrians , who would have to either vend or walk on areas strictly meant meant for vehicular traffic and
c.for the concerned tax authorities(state and Central) to ascertain whether the vendors have been assessed and have paid the related tax dues to the Government ,and whether they have been made aware of their likely obligation?
The extent of free area for movement, can/will never arise because Shillong is already choked by the neck !!
Unless there is an initiative,by the Government of Meghalaya for Urbanisation in the already earmarked New Shillong or elsewhere..
Otherwise, please don’t pin point vendors n vendor groups .
Accidental threat to vendors, was never ever thought of even in a driver’s mind, because all drivers are professionally lisenced!!!
A chaotic PB ( internal road) walk becomes a nuisance n sometimes a nightmare because of – “Is it too many Vendors or pedestrians?? or is it Vehicular Imposition??
Kindly elaborate
As far as tax is concerned, please do an in depth study , how it is in the plains n how it is in Meghalaya, where it concerns vendors or maybe shop keepers etc
But, if you are a tax payer, n if you go deep, then maybe you will have to admit, no small time vendor should pay tax ..Period !!!
They earn a minimum profit of 30 – 100 Tyngka a day !!
So , Man Up !!! and think for the poor of Meghalaya