1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR ### S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.2937/2004 ### Mohan Lal Vs. Nagar Nigam, Jaipur & Anr. ### Date of Order :- 07.08.2009 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.S.CHAUHAN Mr.D.P. Pujari, for the petitioner. Mr.Mahesh Gupta } Mr.Rinesh Gupta }, for the respondents. ### The petitioner has challenged the order dated 12.06.2003 issued by Jaipur Nagar Nigam for removing his Thari which is parked behind the SMS Hospital at Jaipur. It is the case of the petitioner that he has been selling tea, biscuits for which he was given a licence on 31.03.1991 by the Nagar Parishad, Jaipur (as it then was). He has been running the said tea shop before the Bangar Hospital which lies behind the SMS Hospital in Jaipur. He has been regularly depositing the fees and the fine. The receipts of which have been annexed with the writ petition. According to him, respondent No.2, the Jaipur Development Authority ('the JDA', for short) has a scheme for Thari, Thela, Footkar Vyavsai rehabilitation scheme. A news item has appeared with regard to the said scheme. However, despite the existence of the said scheme, the petitioner's name was not taken in the survey 2 conducted. Subsequently on 12.06.2003, the petitioner received a notice issued under Sections 203, 254 of the Municipalities Act directing to the petitioner to remove his Thela within seven days. Hence, this petition before this Court. Mr. D.P. Pujari, the learned counsel for the petitioner, has contended that the petitioner has a fundamental right to earn a living. The said right is being violated by the Jaipur Nagar Nigam. He has further contended that a scheme was prepared by the JDA as a Thari, Thela, Footkar Vyavsai rehabilitation scheme. However, the benefit of the said scheme has not been given to the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner's fundamental right to earn a living is being violated. On the other hand, Mr. Mahesh Gupta and Mr. Rinesh Gupta, the learned counsel for the respondents, have contended that neither the Nagar Nigam, nor the JDA has any scheme for rehabilitating those persons who run a Thela. Thus, the petitioner cannot be rehabilitated by them. According to them, in a Public Interest Litigation, this Court had directed that those vendors who are selling their goods or those vendors who have parked their Thela near SMS hospital should be removed. It is in light of direction of this Court that the notice dated 12.06.2003 was issued. Thus, according to the learned counsel, there is no violation of articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. 3 Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned notice. Undoubtedly, every person has a fundamental right to eek out a living. However, his right to earn a living has been granted as circumscribed by the procedure established by law. Unauthorised Thelawalas, although poor and illiterate, do not have the right to earn a living until and unless they are so permitted by the local authorities, be they the Municipal Council or the Development authority. In the present case, the petitioner has not been granted any permission to run his business on a Thela parked near the hospital by either of the two authorities. Moreover, neither the Jaipur Nagar Nigam, nor the JDA seem to have any rehabilitation plan for those who are earning a living by selling their goods/items on Thelas. Therefore, the petitioner cannot claim that he has a fundamental right to sell tea, biscuits behind the SMS Hospital in Jaipur. At best, the petitioner is a trespasser who can be evicted by the Municipality under the Municipalities Act. In this view of the matter, this Court does not find any merit in this writ petition. Hence, it is, hereby, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. (R.S.CHAUHAN)J. Manoj Solanki