Amid growing criticism and concerns over its potential political fallout, particularly with upcoming elections in Haryana and Jammu and Kashmir, the Congress high command stepped in. Under pressure, Singh was forced to clarify that no official decision had been made and to walk back his remarks. Sources suggest the minister was summoned to Delhi and reprimanded by senior party leaders, including Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge, for mishandling the situation, which now threatens to harm the party’s image.

Brief background about the contentious order: On September 25, the Congress-led Himachal Pradesh government mandated all food vendors and eateries in the state to display the names and addresses of their owners, aiming to increase ‘transparency’ for customers. This decision was announced by Himachal Pradesh Assembly Speaker Kuldeep Singh Pathania in a Facebook post following a meeting of the state’s Urban Development and Municipal Corporation on Tuesday.

Pathania had stated, “In Himachal, all restaurants and fast-food outlets will now be required to display the owner’s identification to ensure convenience for customers. Instructions for this were issued during yesterday’s Urban Development and Municipal Corporation meeting.”

Himachal Pradesh Urban Development Minister Vikramaditya Singh had also announced on social media that every restaurant and fast-food outlet in the state would be required to display the owner’s identification. “This will ensure that the public faces no difficulties and will also enhance accountability,” Singhhad had stated. (Details can be read here)

Himachal Pradesh government clarifies stance on vendor name display order: In response to concerns surrounding Himachal Pradesh Minister Vikramaditya Singh’s announcement about mandatory name displays for street vendors, the state government issued a clarification on September 27. The government stated that no such decision had been officially taken. A government spokesperson confirmed that no policy requiring street vendors to display nameplates or identification on their stalls had been implemented. The government emphasised its commitment to addressing the concerns of street vendors and considering all suggestions before making any decisions.

Potential political fallout and minister’s clarification: Amid fears that Minister Singh’s remarks could escalate into a controversy and damage the party’s electoral prospects in Haryana and Jammu and Kashmir, Singh himself issued a clarification under pressure from the Congress high command, according to party sources. The spokesperson also noted that a committee, which includes both Congress and BJP MLAs, had already been formed to review the matter. The final decision on this policy will be based on recommendations from the committee, which is led by Industries and Parliamentary Affairs Minister Harshwardhan Chauhan.

The committee also comprises several key figures including Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Minister AnirudhSingh, Public Works Minister Vikramaditya Singh, and MLAs Anil Sharma, Satpal Satti, Randhir Sharma, and Harish Janartha. The spokesperson emphasised that the committee would thoroughly review suggestions from various stakeholders before submitting its recommendations to the state government. Once these recommendations are finalised, they will be evaluated by the cabinet for a final decision.

Initial defence of security concerns:

Before the policy was rolled back, Vikramaditya Singh had defended the order, citing the need to maintain “internal security” in the state. In a statement to ANI on September 26, 2024, Singh explained that the decision to require eateries and shops to display owner names aimed at enhancing the state’s internal security and ensuring hygienic conditions, especially regarding street food vendors. Singh emphasised that while businesses commonly display their registration details, this policy was introduced in response to growing security concerns. He also stressed that the policy had no connection to a similar order in Uttar Pradesh.

Singh cited public apprehensions about the increasing number of migrants in the state as one of the reasons for the policy. He noted that while people from outside Himachal were welcome to work there, it was crucial to maintain internal security and hygiene standards. Singh mentioned that the High Court had raised concerns about the situation, prompting the government to take measures ensuring business establishments, regardless of the owners’ origin, reveal their identity. Singh reiterated that the directive aimed to safeguard Himachal’s residents.

#WATCH | Delhi: On Himachal Pradesh Government’s order for eateries to display the names of owners being compared to a similar order in UP, state’s minister Vikramaditya Singh says, “This has nothing to do with UP or Yogi Adityanath. Himachal Pradesh is a separate state, it has… pic.twitter.com/KrdE42S4sx

— ANI (@ANI) September 26, 2024

Himachal Pradesh Congress in-charge Rajeev Shukla had also addressed concerns surrounding the controversy, stating that no mandatory name display policy had been enforced. He refuted comparisons being drawn with Uttar Pradesh’s similar mandate for identity card displays, clarifying that no such decision had been taken in Himachal. Shukla further defended the government’s efforts to regulate street vendors and issue licenses, pointing out that the issue was being unnecessarily politicised. He submitted a detailed report to the Congress high command, explaining the state’s decision-making process.

Congress to reprimand Singh: Following the backlash, Vikramaditya Singh was reportedly summoned to Delhi by the Congress leadership, where he was reprimanded for his handling of the issue. According to sources cited by India Today, Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge expressed displeasure with Singh’s actions, which have since escalated into a significant political issue for the ruling party in Himachal Pradesh. Singh was asked to provide further clarification on the decision and was cautioned to be more careful with future statements and policy framing to avoid confusion and controversy.

Related:

Hygiene or Harassment? Fears of profiling arise as UP government, once again, mandate name displays at food establishments; HP govt follows

Two petitions filed in SC challenging UP and Uttarakhandgovernments’ directive to display name of shop owner and staff for being unconstitutional

Supreme Court stays directive of state forcing food sellers along Kanwar Yatra to display names, states authorities cannot usurp power without legal foundation

Rajasthan: Newly elected BJP MLA from Hawa Mahal constituency, Bal Mukund Acharya launches assault on minority-run meat food stalls

The post Vendor ID display Controversy: Congress high command compels Himachal minister to backtrack on contentious mandate after uproar appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Indian civil society is flummoxed by the recent series of measures undertaken by the Gujarat administration to ensure the safety of Prime Minister Narendra Modi who is visiting the state for a few days. Some of the precautionary measures include asking street vendors to not operate their shops and detention of activists and dissenters. This has prompted activists to write to the PM himself.

In their letter, over 80 activists, including peace activist and Jesuit priest Fr. Cedric Prakash, have pointed out to the PM, “The authorities have issued orders that in all the areas that you will be visiting and along the route that you would be travelling, street vendors should not conduct business from March 10-12. Street vendors who work on the SG highway, Prahladnagar, Ashram Road, Airport area, Stadium, 132 feet Ring Road and the GMDC area and Vastrapur Lake have already been closed for vending as conveyed to us by representatives of street vendors.”

While they understand the need for reasonable restrictions for a few hours while the PM’s convoy is passing through an area, they activists have condemned the blanket order to shut ship for three days saying, “While the police and authorities have the mandate to ensure that there would be no compromise in the security of the PM and his entourage, such a violation of the right to pursue livelihood of thousands of citizens simply cannot be tolerated; such unconstitutional orders and harassment by public officials need to be stopped forthwith.”

Activists have also pointed out how the police and local administration have used this opportunity to issue orders for preventive detention of known dissenters and activists. “Indiscriminate preventive detention and arrests, house arrests, ‘najar kaid’ of civil society activists have started from today, and is expected to intensify further tomorrow,” they have said in the letter. “Such preventive action targeting history-sheeters, people with criminal records, those with licensed fire-arms in the region is understandable; but to harass law-abiding citizens and activists is simply not acceptable, just because they may have expressed dissent or opposition to the government,” say the activists.

The activists have therefore appealed to the PM to “personally intervene to rescind the order preventing street vendors from conducting business for 5 days.” They have further said, “We also demand that you intervene to instruct the DGP of Gujarat to ensure that civil society activists and political leaders are not harassed or detained by the law enforcement authorities.”

The entire letter may be read here: 

Related:

Punjab: PM Modi’s convoy blocked by protesters

The post Violation of rights due to PM visit can’t be tolerated: Civil society to PM appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray’s decision to order a fresh survey and to induct municipal officials in the Town Vending Committees (TVCs) is a violation of the Street Vendors Act, said leader of the Feriwala Sangharsh Samiti (FSS) Dayashankar Singh on November 4, 2020.

The President of Azad Hawkers Union, one of the organisations of the FSS, said that it is a violation of hawker’s rights as well as Supreme Court and Bombay High Court verdicts to start a fresh survey without awarding vending certificates to outstanding applicants from the 2014 survey.

Six years ago, the survey declared 17,641 street vendors out of 99,435 applicants eligible for a vending certificate. However, Thackeray decided on November 3 to hold a fresh survey in Mumbai due to discrepancies in the previous process. Accordingly, authorities also decided to include Brihanmumbai Corporation (BMC) officials in TVCs during a government meeting.

In response to this, Singh said, “Right now, all hawkers have returned to home states due to the coronavirus pandemic. Whom will the government survey on empty streets? This is a strategy to place favourable people in the streets while removing deserving vendors. Further, BMC officials don’t even give receipts to vendors while confiscating their stock. How will they contribute to TVCs?”

The Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014 states that receipts of the fee levied on vendors for working on the streets serves as a valid document to prove their eligibility for a vending certificate. The law also calls for periodic surveys of vendors every five years. For this reason, Singh clarified that he did not oppose the need for a survey but demanded certificates for the already eligible candidates.

“We humbly ask the Chief Minister to declare as ‘hawing zones’ those streets where, between 1988 to 1999, the municipal corporation has collected revenues and given receipts. Further, we request that the 99,435 vendors be given a vending certificate to earn their livelihood. This process has been pending for the last six years,” said Singh.

Related:

Lockdown or Unlock: Hawkers struggle to remain ‘Atma Nirbhar’

Why is the government still ignoring migrants’ lives?

No data, so no compensation: Centre’s shocking revelation on migrant labourer deaths!

India’s street vendors are micro-entrepreneurs, yet they struggle for freedom and rights

The post Give us vending certificates then hold fresh surveys: FSS appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Few people realise that India’s struggle for legal rights continues even today. It is fought along the city’s footpath where a street vendor tries to keep their stall from being towed away by the municipal vehicle.

Article 19(1)(g) of the Indian Constitution enshrines the right to practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business, albeit limited by reasonable restrictions imposed by any law.

Yet, rights are not a sufficient condition to empower the disempowered and disposed, pointed out political scientist Gopal Guru in his article ‘Do Rights have Limits?’

Legal history of vending rights.

The Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014 is commended by hawkers and Unions alike for its provision of legal protection. Under this law, vendors enjoy a legal status, vending certificates, identity cards and most importantly protection from police and local authorities.

The vending certificates, that are issued after conducting a survey, are valid for 10 years after which the vendor will not be given a certificate again. However, the intention of such a clause is to give the vendor the financial independence to start his own shop or similar such business.

The law bestows upon vendors the right to carry on business and to be given a new site for doing business if relocation becomes necessary. It also gives rights against eviction until a 30-day prior notice is given. The law also seeks to protect vendors from harassment by police and local authorities.

Accordingly, the Act mandated creation of Town Vending Committees (TVCs) to address vendor grievances. They are also responsible for maintaining a data-base of vendors, and carrying out social audits.

The law also considered the representation of marginalised communities like Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and protected hawkers from eviction. Moreover, it talked about the importance of public hygiene and health prior to the coronavirus pandemic. Lastly, the Act specifies that its laws are not to be interpreted as conferring ownership rights.

Many of these provisions were adopted from the National Policy on Urban Street Vendors, 2009 that recognized street vendors as a crucial part of the urban trade and distribution system. However, unlike an Act, the policy did not carry a legal edge or ‘legal teeth’ as stated by a ‘Women in Informal Employment: Globalizing and Organizing (WIEGO)’ policy brief of 2011.

It identified street vendors as “micro-entrepreneurs” who play an integral and legitimate part in urban retail trade and distribution system. The policy was created when cities globally face urbanisation and a growing informal sector. Organisations like the National Association of Street Vendors of India (NASVI) and Self-Employed Women’s Association (SEWA) played a crucial role in the formulation of this policy.

SEWA Founder Ela Bhatt said that the country needed “a change of perception, so that businesses and planners see vendors as entrepreneurs and vending as legitimate employment.”

Similarly, the Supreme Court also made innumerable attempts to address the prejudice associated with street vending. In 1985, it made a landmark judgement that recognised hawking as a constitutionally protected activity that ought to be regulated.

Soon after in 1989, the court ruled that the right to trade or do business on street pavement cannot be denied simply because the streets are meant for walking. This judgement was monumental for its acknowledgement of the poverty prevalent in India. The verdict stated that “there is no justification to deny the citizens of their right to earn livelihood by using the public streets for the purpose of trade and business.” It essentially set the tone for the policy that was created in 2009.

Current situation

However, according to Bombay High Court advocate Manmohan Rao, these historic efforts have proved ineffective due to a severe concentration of power with local authorities.

Vendors often complain to him about illegal confiscation. As per Section 19 of the Act, even those vendors who have not received a certificate should be returned their goods within one to two days depending on the perishability of the product. However, in reality, the vendors are charged fines ranging from Rs. 1200 to Rs. 1250 and still never get their goods back.

“The police lodge FIRs against the vendors claiming obstruction of justice. This is a non-bailable offence that sends the case directly to the sessions court and not to the magistrate,” said Rao.

Rao also said that Section 33 of the Act has an overriding effect over all other laws but it is not recognised by administrative officials. Due to this, surveys to identify eligible vendors and the formation of TVCs are still pending in many cities. Local authorities like the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) demand domiciles and other documents for issuance of identity cards even though the Act does not ask for such items.

“Nowadays, officials claim that street-vending will increase the number of COVID-19 cases in Mumbai,” said Rao, “They can easily check the temperature of the vendors working in every ward. Even so, they insist that the vendors should be removed from all streets,” said Rao.

He added that the hawkers are still waiting for Rs. 10,000 promised by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman in July to as many as 50 lakhs street vendors in the country.

Street vending and social bias

According to ‘Financial Inclusion of the Marginalised: Street Vendors in the Urban Economy’ written by economists Sharit Bhowmik and Debdulal Saha in 2013, street vending offers a means of livelihood to a huge section of the urban poor. It is an important segment of the urban informal sector that as per government estimates provides livelihood to ten million persons.  This number triples when accounting for the dependents in vendor families.

Yet in reality hawkers do not seem to enjoy the dignity of labour due to such an important clog in the urban trade machinery.

Chairperson of Labour Studies at Tata Institute of Social Science (TISS) Dr Varsha Ayyar suggested that this discord may be explained sociologically by considering two things – the will of the State and the moral understanding of society.

Street vending as a job increased significantly in Mumbai after the shutting down of mills. Vendors have always catered to the working class and middle class. They service the city, yet face discrimination.

“For a city to be inclusive, the State needs to consider this work as contribution and not encroachment,” said Ayyar.

The same goes for the civil society, she said. Welfare associations stand against vendors because they do not find them useful. They do not realise that vendors make items accessible especially for other marginalised individuals like a woman who returns from home and needs to buy food to cook dinner.

However, for marginalised communities in India, even rights assured by the law are not guaranteed to be enforced, she said.

Citing Gopal Guru, Ayyar said that enforcement has a moral underpinning. Morality, thus, becomes a hurdle in exercising one’s right just as a market prejudiced by social thinking limits the rights of a vegetable street vendor.

“Gopal Guru says that rights cannot empower one to bypass caste-based or majority-based prejudice. Economic institutions, such as the market, are not sufficient to guarantee the rights of individuals. For a right to be a reality, it has to be disentangled from the constraining circles of social relationship,” said Ayyar.

Thus, when it comes to enforcement, the onus lies on the civil society and the State to protect the livelihood of the vulnerable.

“We are the kind of society that has a middle-class narrative of viewing vendors as parasites. Yet street vendors make every person a part of the consumption process. So, the question is: How do we look at important contributing members of society and what do we owe to them?” said Ayyar.

Related:

Job losses mount, recession looms as India battles Covid-19

UP BJP MLA asks people not to buy vegetables from Muslim vendors

The post India’s street vendors are micro-entrepreneurs, yet they struggle for freedom and rights  appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The workday begins in the evening for food-seller Mohammad Irshad. As office workers rush back home, he opens his stall ready to offer savory items like kathi rolls, chicken rolls.

“Nearly, 70 percent of office workers in Delhi are dependent on food stalls. Yet, during the pandemic we are among the first shooed away,” he said.

Irshad prides himself for his business that he started with his friend in 2002.

“My parents were labourers in Bihar. I came to Delhi wanting to start my own business and finish my education at the same time,” said Irshad.

Both of these dreams came true for him after he and his friend started their own food stall. The two used to watch YouTube videos, learn from their friends or watch other cooks at work until they figured out how to make the snacks. Each borrowed about Rs. 5,000 from their friends and went about the Red Fort area looking for materials to build the stall.

“We first started working at Suraj Vihar in East Delhi and within a few days, we had to deal with RWA [Resident Welfare Association] officials. They claimed we did not have the right to work there,” he said.

Over the last 18-20 years, Irshad said that such interrogation by resident officials, police and municipality workers had only increased. “You get used to it,” Irshad said dismissively.

The first time he faced the police, Irshad agreed to pay the officer monthly to stay out of trouble. It took him years to finally stand up to them and ask them not to bother him.

Over time, he figured out how to defend his business. Until 2010, Irshad had not known he could use the police-given fine receipts as proof of his business. Nor did he know that he didn’t need to pay the police but had to file for a food license instead. In 2013, he finally applied for the license with the help of an NGO Janpahal and now works with a food license.

One of his regular customers, a lawyer at the Supreme Court encouraged him to participate in the local Town Vending Committee (TVC.) He is now a TVC member of Sahdara South zone, East Delhi.

“I still wanted to help other people. So, I founded an organisation, Ekta Rehdipatri Sangh, to help other vendors file for their documents,” he said.

Before the pandemic, Irshad used to spend about three hours daily preparing for the food. He earned about Rs. 8-10,000 a month. Even so, he argued that food-sellers fare the worst among all the vendors. He reasoned that other vendors sell dry items such as mufflers, toys and only have to be wary of the police. On the other hand, food-sellers sell wet-items.

“We have to watch out for three kinds of people: the Corporation officials, the health officers and general body officers,” said Irshad.

The health officials end up being the most critical of food vendors despite a food license.

“The health officials are among the first to ridicule our vending rights,” he said.

Another problem Irshad mentioned is that a majority of hawkers do not know their own rights.  Therefore, they do not know what to do when the police or municipality officials take away their goods. The vendors are charged with Rs. 4000-5000 fine while their stalls are thrown into the municipality trucks, damaging property bought with their hard-earned money.

“A lot of us are scared. The corporation officials either don’t know or don’t care about our rights. But the law is for everyone. They should listen to us,” he said.

He alleged that this is the biggest cause of corruption – a complete dismissal of others rights.

Even before the enactment of the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood And Regulation Of Street Vending) Act, the Supreme Court had explicitly said on September 9 2013, that those vendors who have received a fine prior to this date should not be bothered.

When asked about the Vendors Act, Irshad said the law properly protects vendors’ rights on paper. However, he wishes that the authorities would provide the services mentioned in the Act such as grievance redressal committees.

“When we approach the court with our grievances, we are told to go to the TVC officials. However, even that committee had its first election in 2018 although the Act was made in 2014,” he said.

Regarding the stigma related to vending he said, “You might call me a vendor but I am a businessman.”

Irshad said that the only difference between a vendor and a businessman with a shop is that vendors have “a sword hanging over them.” They don’t know when they’ll be forced into more harassment.

Similarly, he questioned why stalls are cleared from the streets every time a big personality comes to the town.

“The reason is simple. They do not want to show poverty. To them, the stalls are a symbol of poverty,” he said.

Irshad’s pride in his work is in stark contrast to how Vijayalaxmi Gaikwad, a flower-seller in Mumbai, entered the profession.

Widowed at the age of 20 years, Vijayalaxmi became a flower-seller like her mother to take care of her daughter. Taking a loan of Rs. 200-300 from her mother, she began selling flowers outside Saint Joseph High School in Vikhroli, her alma mater. She never had to deal with school children except on teacher’s day but tried to hide away from the professors.

“For the first two months, I hid her face from my teachers. I was embarrassed to be seen selling flowers on the street,” she said. However, as time went by, Vijayalaxmi received the encouragement of her teachers and friends and began focusing on her work.

“Good job. You have nothing to be shy about – that’s what my teachers and friends used to tell me. Slowly, I gained pride towards my work,” said Vijayalaxmi.

Before the lockdown measures were enacted, she used to earn Rs. 200-300 per day and Rs. 2000 during festivals. Nowadays, she lives at her home in Kalwa waiting for the trains to start once again. The working of the trains is vital for her work.

Every day, Vijayalaxmi boarded the 11 AM train to Dadar station to buy 10-12 kgs of varying flowers such as lilies, jasmine, mogra, chrysanthemum. The first part of this process involved pleasant talks with wholesalers. During the latter half, her real work began as she took the goods back to Vikhroli. Balancing the huge bags of flowers on her heads, she boarded the women’s special compartment and stood to the side, waiting to get off at her platform.

“Once I had to throw the flowers at Ghatkopar station because the crowd completely crushed the flowers and then pushed it off at the station. I have to protect those flowers from dirt and the fishmongers in the train. No one will buy the flowers otherwise,” she said.

Vijayalaxmi weaved the flowers into garlands and gajra, often bought for religious purposes. Accordingly, cleanliness played as big a role in her work as it did for Irshad except she did not have to deal with the officials’ harassment.

Even so, as the President of the Azad Hawkers Union, Vijayalaxmi has had her fair share of conflicts with authority figures.

“The BMC and police used to trouble us a lot. Technically, they are only allowed to keep us away from the streets till 9 PM. But there have been days when I have had to come to Vikhroli at 11 PM or 12 AM along with other officials to help other vendors being harassed by the police,” she said.

Vijayalaxmi agreed that there was an issue of crowding as more and more vendors gathered in one area and hindered the pedestrians. Police often came there for such reasons. However, she complained of the manner in which the fines were charged to them in such situations.

“They used to charge Rs. 1250 and then gave us a receipt that read Rs. 1200. For street vendors, those Rs. 50 make a big difference,” she said.

As in the case of Delhi, the Bombay High Court had previously said that hawkers working prior to 2014, should be given certificates. Over a lakh vendors were also identified in a 1997 survey conducted by Tata Institute of Social Sciences and the Youth for Unity and Voluntary Action (YUVA) called the ‘Tata YUVA Survey.’ However, the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) called for another survey which has created a lot of confusion regarding new vendors, said Vijayalaxmi.

Although living in different cities, under different circumstances, Irshad and Vijayalaxmi have similar complaints. The man-handling of their goods by municipal officials, the illegal confiscations by police and the lack of respect towards their profession.

“Other people are given due respect for their work. However, we never receive any appreciation for anyone. We do not ask for applause but the government could at least ensure that our rights are protected,” she said.

Related:

Stop targeting, discriminating against and attacking vendors and hawkers: National Hawker Federation
Lockdown or Unlock: Hawkers struggle to remain ‘Atma Nirbhar’

The post Businesspersons on the street: A day in the life of street vendors appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Vendors fighting for vending space in Beltola market

The National Policy on Urban Street Vendors, 2009 (see box 1) has estimated that street vendors constitute 2 per cent of the population in various cities. Though street vending plays a vital role in providing livelihood to a large underprivileged section of the society, its contribution has not been accepted by city authorities or urban planning agencies so far. Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India provides all citizens the right to practice any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business. At the same time, different sections of Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Police Act empower the executive to remove any obstruction on streets.

Also, Municipal Acts empower municipalities to remove encroachments on roads as obstructions. Lastly, vending on streets and open spaces is not considered a legal use in the city’s Master Plan or Local Area Plan as it does not conform to the land use provision in such plans. For city administrators, any land use in violation of the statutory plan demands eviction.

Together, multiple laws work towards evicting street vendors from urban space, thereby making them vulnerable to bribery and extortion by local government officials, police and mafia (who act as protectors) as a price to stay put. Realizing this, the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014, provides for reservation of 2 per cent of the city’s lands for vendors in a way that the ‘natural markets’ (markets that are naturally formed where there is demand), are protected. In addition, if any eviction is required, alternate space must be allocated to these vendors. In essence, the Act provides for allocating physical space to vendors in the city to protect their livelihood and provide city dwellers with easy access to goods and services offered by the vendors.
Guwahati has occupied a position of eminence as a trade and commerce centre for North-East India because of National Highway-37 and North-Frontier Railway based connectivity with the rest of the country. Additionally, River Brahmaputra is also used for transporting goods and people. This explains the existence of informal markets like Fancy Bazar, Machkowa and Uzan Bazar (Map on next page) along the mighty river.

“Poverty, Inequality and Violence in Indian Cities: Towards Inclusive Policies and Planning,” a three-year research project (2012-16) undertaken by Centre for Urban Equity (CUE), CEPT University in Ahmedabad and Guwahati, and Institute for Human Development in Delhi and Patna, is funded by the International Development Research Centre (IDRC), Canada and Department of International Development (DFID), UK, under the global programme Safe and Inclusive Cities (SAIC). The research analyses the pathways through which exclusionary urban planning and governance leads to different types of violence on the poor and by the poor in Indian cities.

The CUE research takes an expansive approach to violence, examining structural or indirect violence (material deprivation, inequality, exclusion), direct violence (direct infliction of physical or psychological harm), overt conflict and its links to violence and different types of crime, noting that not all types of violence are considered as crime (for example, violence by the state), and not all types of crimes are considered as violence (for example, theft).

In Guwahati, the largest city in and gateway to the Northeast India, the research has focused on two hills, two street vendors’ markets and women’s safety in transport. Two markets, Ulubari and Beltola, have been studied. The partial withdrawal of the State from governance of these market spaces presents conditions for deprivations and conflicts among street vendors.

One of the oldest markets in the city is Kacharighat market where farmers (who came by boats and bullock carts), small traders and informal vendors sold grains, vegetables and poultry. Indigenous women (mainly from the Garo community) travelled all the way from neighbouring villages to sell hill produce and local vegetables in Kachari Basti market in Ulubari before leaving for home in the evening. As the city grew, especially after shifting of the state capital to Dispur, the demand for perishable farm produce continued to rise.

Improved transport connectivity made Guwahati an attractive market to people who now travelled (between 20 to 200 km) from settlements in Naogaon, Barpeta, Kharuptia and Rangia with their produce to markets in the city. Vending became an occupation not only for the poor in the city but also for farmers from the neighbouring countryside and districts.

TYPES OF MARKETS IN GUWAHATI
Guwahati has three major kinds of informal markets namely, a) GMC (Guwahati Municipal Corporation) rent markets, b) Daily markets, and c) Bi-weekly markets. In markets rented out by GMC, the shopkeepers pay a monthly rent to the local body directly. In the other two types of markets, GMC collects taxes through an annual lease under the provisions of the GMC (Lease of Parking Places and Markets) Bye-Laws, 2009. The lessee is identified on the basis of an annual bid where the successful bidder pays 30 per cent of the bid amount within 24 hours after the written offer is issued. The remaining 70 per cent has to be paid in nine equal instalments.

In order to maximize profit, the lessee employs people to recover as much money as they can from the vendors selling their wares in that particular market. Owing to the lack of any fixed rents or regulation, conditions favourable for exploitation are created, which then has potential to create conflicts between the lessees and the vendors.

Additionally, there are markets on roadsides, community lands or public land that are managed by Unnayan Samitis (Lakhra), youth clubs (Garchuk) and influential individuals (along the highway in Garchuk). The Unnayan Samitis pay taxes to GMC and recover charges (as high as INR 20 to INR 50 daily) from the vendors. The rates are linked to the wares that are being sold. Usually, cloth and meat vendors are charged INR 50; Sunday market vendors are charged INR 100 and for permanent kiosks, the rates exclude electricity charges.

Unnayan Samitis provide lighting, undertake cleaning and development works using the charges collected from the vendors. Youth clubs collect charges but some of them (for example in Garchuk), reportedly do not pay anything to GMC. The Indian Railways has also given land on lease to vendors in Bamunimaidan where it collects INR 5 per day from each vendor. Other markets along the roadside in Guwahati report payment of INR 20 per day to the GMC appointed tax collectors as scavenging tax. Sometimes, tax collectors would demand INR 10 (instead of INR 20) without offering any receipt to the vendors.

This then means that the vendors have to bear the costs of loss of business. A participant said:
“Two years ago, my son was beaten by one passenger when we were trying to get into the train with our vegetable bags against their advice. We tolerated this brutal act [of the passenger] and didn’t say anything.

“This is our livelihood and hence we have to go by train. We do not have any other work to do. We are doing this work due to extreme poverty and have only this option for our survival.”
Passengers often complained to Railway Protection Force (RPF) and Government Railway Police (GRP) personnel about the vendors. The RPF/GPF personnel in turn, harass the vendors, collecting bribes of INR 20-30 from each vendor per trip. Sometimes, they get into physical conflicts with the vendors. Owing to the lack of proper transport options, vendors bear additional economic, emotional and physical losses while transporting their wares from their settlement to the market.

When vendors are unable to sell their entire stock in a day or missed the last train back home, they are forced to stay back in the city at night. Owing to the absence of night shelters and storage spaces, they spend the night at the railway station. Participants reported that they ended up losing their money and goods to thieves while asleep on the railway platform. Thus, not only did they feel unsafe in the city at night but there were also economic costs of unwillingly spending the night in the city. Women vendors also feared sexual harassment in addition to other problems reported by male vendors while sleeping on the railway platform.

“One day, a RPF cop demanded INR 100 from me. When I couldn’t give money, the cop kept one bag of vegetables with him and asked me to load the remaining bags inside the train. I was furious and shouted at him. He did not return my bag. I lost my patience and caught his shoulder; his badge came into my hand. He was scared and returned my bag of vegetables.”

Space crises
Conflicts due to lack of space: Earlier vendors cooperated with each other to adjust space for displaying each other’s wares, however congestion in the markets has led to vending space-based conflicts. For example, most women vendors in the Beltola market occupy a space whose area fell between 6 to 12 square feet per stall, while most men vendors occupy more than 35 square feet space per stall. This causes great tension between female and male vendors with the former feeling unhappy about the capture of the limited vending space by the latter. This often results in verbal fights. When matters go out of hand, women reportedly throw away their male counterparts’ vegetables to stake and reinforce their claim on the vending space.

“In case, someone occupies my space, I scold and fight with him to take my place. And if that doesn’t work, I throw away his vegetables.”
Conflicts aggravated in this market because the GMC converted one of its municipal grounds used for vending into a multi-storey building which led to a loss of vending space for male vendors. These vendors were not formally relocated, and squeezed themselves into nearby markets where women vendors operate. This imposed high economic costs on the vendors who had to pay tax not only to the lessee but also to the earlier occupant of the vending space (as high as INR 100-200 per day). Some were forced to sell their livestock back home to deal with loss of business owing to space crunch. There are other conflicts between vendors on space, which are played out on lines of gender, ethnicity and length of association with the market.

Conflicts are also reported between tribal vendors and migrant Muslim vendors. The tribals raise issues of ethnicity to stake their claim on vending space. Similarly, Garo vendors come seasonally to the Ulubari market but enjoy higher claims on the vending space and invariably get into verbal conflicts with regular vendors.

“We have been vending here since inception of this market; you people should leave space for us on market days.”  
The local Unnayan Samiti opined against the claims of the Garo vendors arguing that since the latter were not regular in coming to the market they cannot stake claim to the space in the market. The regular vendors did not usually protest, but instances have been reported where conflicts quickly escalate into physical fights with vendors throwing vegetables away from the vending space. Overall, the management of vending space by lessees and vendors committees is found to be informal and ad-hoc, with no responsibility being taken by these actors to resolve conflicts between vendors. Vendors are forced to spill over and occupy spaces on nearby footpaths. They also pay heavy economic costs in terms of loss of vegetables and loss of opportunities for selling their wares.

Lack of storage space: Vendors face problems in storing their unsold goods, weighing instruments and plastic sheets that provide them protection from the elements. Around 72 per cent and 47 per cent vendors in Beltola market and Ulubari market respectively were unable to store their wares. They often sell their remaining goods, mainly vegetables, at throwaway prices by the end of the day, thereby incurring losses. Many vendors rent rooms near the market for living as well as for storing their wares. Around 17 per cent Ulubari market women vendors use storage spaces rented by the local women vendors’ committee while 27 per cent vendors stored their wares behind their vending spaces. The lack of storage spaces impose economic costs on the vendors.

Mitigating conflicts over space: However, there were also mechanisms to mitigate possibilities of conflict over space. In Beltola market, few residents and shopkeepers rented out their front yard to vendors who paid the former rent on a monthly/ weekly basis. These residents/ shopkeepers become custodians of the space rented out to vendors in the latter’s absence for short periods of time. Similarly, when a vendor who sold her/his wares on the main road is unable to come for many days, neighbours take care of that space. They allow new vendors to occupy the above mentioned space temporarily, but not after the arrival of their absent neighbour. Informal relations, acquaintance and camaraderie governed the local management of vending space in this case.

In Ulubari, the earliest vendors had merely occupied different portions of the available space. Later, as the number of vendors rose and a women vendors’ committee (Unnayan Samiti) was formed, spaces were earmarked by the committee for women vendors (especially tribals) coming from different areas. It was reported that women vendors coming from Bornihat and Sonapur enjoyed the first right over vending space followed by those coming from Barpeta Road. Muslim male vendors were the last ones in the pecking order. Thus, the space management in Ulubari is slightly more formalized than Beltola.

Vendors braving the rains in Guwahati

Deprivations as structural violence
No protection against natural elements: Our FGDs revealed that lack of protection from the elements was a major concern for street vendors. Since they were poor, they had no option but to continue selling their wares under the sun. This led to health problems like headaches that ate further into their already meagre earnings. Owing to the lack of protection from the elements, street vendors lost business on days when conditions were not favourable, especially during monsoons and summer.

“Last Sunday, I had a severe headache and pain in my waist. Hence, I gave all my vegetables to another vendor and went back to home.”
 

Box 1: Highlights of the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014
i) The Act aims to protect the livelihood rights of street vendors as well as regulate street vending through demarcation of vending zones, conditions for and restrictions on street vending.
ii) A Town Vending Committee (TVC) to be formed for every town. Any person intending to undertake street vending needs to register with the TVC. He/ she may then apply for a vending certificate that will be issued based on various criteria.
iii) The TVC comprises of the municipal commissioner, representatives of street vendors, local authority, planning authority, local police, resident welfare association and other traders associations.
iv) The state government to frame a scheme for street vendors. The local authority, in consultation with the planning authority, to frame a street vending plan once every five years.
v) Natural markets (those that have come up naturally on account of demand) not to be disturbed while framing street vending plans.
vi) No eviction of vendors to be undertaken without relocation.
vii) The Act recommends the reservation of 2 per cent land for vending as part of master plans and local area plans
 

Deprivation due to absence of basic services: The absence of public toilets, potable water and storage spaces are considered as major concerns of vendors. The lack of these facilities affect women vendors more than their male counterparts who chose to relieve themselves nearby. Women vendors from Sonapur reported that since no toilets are available at the markets, they go to neighbouring houses for relieving themselves. Sometimes, the nearby house owners make uncharitable remarks on them. Also, going to neighbouring areas takes time and they have to leave their wares unattended or in the care of neighbours, often resulting in thefts.

“If I consume more water, I need to go to urinate frequently, thus I take less water as far as possible.”
Women therefore avoid drinking required amounts of water to reduce frequency of urination, resulting in health problems such as urinary tract infections in the long term.

In Beltola market, a large proportion of the participants reported using road-side space (28 per cent) and nearby houses (28 per cent) for relieving themselves at the cost of hygiene and dignity. Similar concerns were echoed in Ulubari where the local women vendors’ committee had rented a toilet but access was controlled through a lock whose keys were not accessible to all. As many as 47 per cent of the women vendors used this toilet whenever it was open. Otherwise, they depended on their friends’ homes in the neighbourhood. A three-seater toilet rented by sSTEP, an NGO, was considered inadequate considering the volume of vendors that sell their wares at the market.

“In case, we feel an acute need to visit the toilet, we go to the drain. At that time, we do not think about our self-prestige and dignity. I mean, if men would see us relieving ourselves…”
Deprivation due to lack of potable water: Another major concern stated by vendors was the unavailability of potable water. One-third of vendors in Beltola market purchased expensive packaged water for drinking purposes. Others brought water from their homes or got water from nearby hotels and temples for sprinkling on their vegetables to keep them fresh. In Ulubari market, close to half the vendors brought water from home for drinking and other purposes.

Ad-hoc nature of tax collection by lessee resulting in conflicts
Although the tax rates to be collected by the lessee are fixed, many overcharge. In Beltola market, lessee charged the vendors more tax than that prescribed by GMC for its markets – more so during the interim period when lessee’s contract period lapses and fresh tenders are invited by GMC. Clause 22 of terms and conditions for settlement of the markets of GMC (2013) states that “the lessee shall collect toll at the prescribed rates only.” In case of complaints against demanding excess tax, either by the lessee or by their agents or employees, “the lessee shall be liable to be prosecuted U/S 384 of IPC and lease shall be terminated forthwith.”

Clause 35 of the terms and conditions states that “the lessee shall display a signboard of the approved rates of toll at a prominent place in the markets at their own cost.” Our survey revealed that while GMC does not allow collection of more than INR 70 per vendor per day, the lessee collected up to INR 300 per vendor per day. Vendors reported that the lessee’s tax is not only high but it also varied temporally and from one vendor to another.

For the first few months of a lessee’s tenure, the vendors paid INR 100 which gradually increased to INR 300 by the end of the year. The lessee also collected INR 200 from each truck at night as parking fee in violation of the terms prescribed by GMC. The vendors strongly resented the lease system due to high economic costs, however the vendors did not challenge the lessee as he evokes fear of bodily harm and fear of loss of vending space in the market.

Extortion by local youth clubs and goons
The vendors get harassed by local goons for money when they went to the market at night with their goods. The vendors were not able to defend themselves against the goons as they feared for their safety. They perceived the policemen to be in nexus with the goons.

“Once, we reached Beltola market at 2 am and were unloading our goods from the truck. Some drunken local goons asked for INR 1,000. When we refused to pay, they beat us. Only police can help us in this kind of situation. In Beltola market, lessee and local goons beat us, no one comes forward to rescue us.”

Besides local goons, different groups of local boys also harassed them by asking huge amounts from INR 500 to INR 1,000 for celebrating Bihu, Durga Puja and other local festivals.

“For any festival, chanda can be given once but in Beltola market, every market day local boys collect chanda. On the first market day, local youths take INR 600, then on second market day INR 200 and then INR 300 on third market day and so on.”

These kinds of extortion have a huge impact on the already meagre incomes of the vendors.

VENDORS’ RECOMMENDATIONS:
# Beltola market vendors suggested that GMC should not award tax collection through competitive bidding as it increased the bidding price by as much as three times when compared to the base price. The lessee then has to recover this money from vendors, ultimately increasing the tax burden on vendors.

# There was a need for greater vigilance by police. Since GMC collects huge taxes from the markets, police force must be deputed to maintain law and order in the markets, especially at night.
# To avoid conflicts between regular and irregular vendors in Ulubari market, participants suggested that vending space should be allotted to regular male and irregular tribal women vendors separately.

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
The state’s withdrawal from governance of the markets has left the space open for exploitative private parties to conduct their business. GMC should ensure that its withdrawal from the markets must be accompanied by the creation of representative market management committees that can safeguard the interests of the vendors. At the same time, the GMC should also plan for vending spaces in the city.
# The development plan mechanism must identify and reserve spaces for local markets as recommended by the Street Vendors’ Act of 2014.
# GMC has completed street vendor surveys in Guwahati. The formation of street vending committees and zonal vending committees in all markets must be expedited.
# GMC must delineate a) free vending areas – where street vending is allowed without restrictions, b) restricted vending areas – areas where vending is permitted on specific days or time or by trade, and c) no-vending zones – streets having arterial/ heavy traffic. Vendors affected by the creation of no-vending zones must be accommodated in vending zones nearby through the use of measures like time-sharing that can be implemented using the TVC/ZVC mechanism.
# The process of issuing licenses to street vendors must be expedited. These licenses must include names of beneficiaries, name of the market, timings and charges to prevent harassment by various state and non-state actors.
# Street vending schemes must by virtue of their design exhibit sensitivity to the needs of the vendors and their customers, especially women, children and differently-abled.
# GMC must contribute towards building the capacities of vendors so that they can come together and form market management committees for their governance.
# GMC must help prevent exploitation of vendors by lessees, private plot owners and vendor committees. In lieu of a nominal tax collected from the managing body, the vendors and their customers must be given access to clean and safe markets.
# The state must ensure the safety and security of women vendors who feel threatened by their male counterparts and unwelcome owing to the lack of basic facilities like sanitation, storage and night shelters. Access to basic services such as shade, potable water, well-lit and clean toilets must be ensured. In addition, facilities like night shelters and storage spaces for vegetables and other belongings of vendors need to be provided.
—

*This is the fourth Policy Brief in the series prepared by the Research Team (Guwahati) of  the Centre for Urban Equity (CUE), CEPT University, Ahmedabad, on “Safe and Inclusive Cities – Poverty, Inequity and Violence in Indian Cities: Towards Inclusive Policies and Planning” . One of the researchers is from the Society for Social Transformation & Environment Protection (sSTEP)
Courtesy: CUE, CEPT University, Ahmedabad

Courtesy: counterview.org
 

The post How State Withdrawal, even Partial, from the Market Caused Deprivation in Street Vendors: Guwahati appeared first on SabrangIndia.