Jul 20, 2025
In India’s rapidly urbanizing landscape, the struggle over who belongs in the city is increasingly being played out on public squares and roadside markets. Street vendors, rickshaw drivers, and other informal workers are often deemed “encroachers” on public space and are visible targets for eviction during beautification drives or urban renewal schemes. Yet, these workers are integral to the social and economic fabric of Indian cities. Nowhere is this contradiction more visible than in Delhi, where efforts to present a modern, orderly capital routinely come at the expense of the very people who keep it running.
A fragile livelihood at odds with urban aesthetics
The informal economy supports nearly 70 percent of Delhi’s workforce, and street vending remains a vital livelihood for millions across cities (WIEGO 2022, 14). In Delhi, vendors provide essential goods and services to a diverse range of residents, from office workers grabbing lunch at food stalls to low-income families relying on affordable, mobile markets. Yet despite their everyday visibility, vendors remain precariously positioned within the city’s official planning frameworks.
Urban planning in India often pits the vision of an orderly, “modern” city against the lived realities of informal workers. Planning processes are typically top-down and technocratic, dominated by state agencies with little to no consultation with affected communities. Master plans and zoning laws often overlook or criminalize street vending, labelling it as an encroachment rather than a livelihood (WIEGO 2022, 9). The result is that vendors, waste pickers, and others working in public spaces are regularly treated as obstructions to be cleared.
This exclusionary approach has concrete consequences. In the lead-up to the 2023 G20 Summit in New Delhi, a sweeping beautification campaign resulted in the demolition of informal settlements and the removal of street vendors from key areas. Many of these actions were carried out without notice, relocation, or compensation (Associated Press, 2023). Even licensed vendors were not spared. One food seller, Shankar Lal, who had an official vending permit, was forced to close his stall for months. “The government doesn’t know whether we are dying of hunger or not,” he said, capturing the desperation felt by many during the evictions (Associated Press, 2023).
In cities like Delhi, informal workers are essential to urban life but remain vulnerable to displacement whenever their presence is deemed incompatible with development goals. Their labour is central to the city’s daily functioning, yet their rights to public space are persistently overlooked.
Delhi’s Planning Paradigm: Inclusion on Paper, Exclusion in Practice
At first glance, India has made notable progress in protecting street vendors. The Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, passed in 2014, was hailed as a landmark for its rights-based approach to urban livelihoods. It guaranteed protections against arbitrary eviction, required the formation of Town Vending Committees (TVCs), and laid the foundation for identifying and regulating vending zones in each city.
But implementation has lagged. Many municipalities, including Delhi’s, have delayed forming TVCs and conducting vendor surveys (Times of India, 2023). Even where licenses exist, enforcement remains inconsistent. During recent demolition drives, both licensed and unlicensed vendors were removed without distinction, with NASVI organizers noting that “promises made to us during elections have been forgotten” (The Print, 2025). The Act’s participatory vision of planning with vendors rather than around them has remained largely unrealized in practice.
This disconnect has sparked protests. In June 2025, thousands of informal workers in Delhi marched under the slogan “We are city builders, not illegals,” demanding an end to forced evictions and meaningful inclusion in urban planning (NewsClick, 2025). In response, Delhi’s Urban Development Minister met with vendor associations and pledged to draft a regulatory plan that respects vendors’ rights, offering a rare concession within a largely top-down governance system (NASVI, 2025).
Case Studies Across India
Similar tensions are playing out in other major cities of India, where informal workers face the dual burdens of legal invisibility and social marginalization.
In Mumbai, a 2024 crackdown resulted in the eviction of over 9417 vendors in July alone. The Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) justified the action by citing congestion on footpaths and concerns for pedestrian safety. Activists pointed out that many vendors were operating in officially designated hawking zones (Indian Express, 2024). The July 2024 drive followed a High Court rebuke, and that month alone saw ₹32.7 lakh in fines collected and thousands of livelihoods disrupted. Vendor groups protested the arbitrary enforcement and called for proper implementation of the Street Vendors Act. In response, BMC finalized 30,832 vending pitches across 404 roads and held long-delayed Town Vending Committee elections nearly a decade after the law mandated them (Indian Express, 2024). Yet the majority of the city’s estimated 300,000 hawkers remain excluded from the new system, with only around 32,000 vendors deemed eligible. Hawker associations warned that many vendors, including those who had operated for decades, were left jobless or forced to leave the city entirely.
In Kolkata, mass evictions in mid-2024 cleared nearly 400 footpaths across major commercial and transit areas in just a few days. The campaign, ordered after Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee publicly reprimanded officials for encroachments, led to the overnight removal of thousands of hawkers. The backlash was immediate. Within days, Banerjee suspended the evictions and directed authorities to identify formal hawking zones, stating, “I have no right to make anyone unemployed” (Indian Express, 2024). While the decision was reactive, it signalled a political willingness to prioritize livelihoods. Banerjee emphasized the need for systematic planning and promised that no vendor would be displaced again until alternatives were in place.
In Bangalore, the Tender SURE road redesign project reconfigured key city streets with wide sidewalks, cycling lanes, and buried utilities. Although prioritizing open, obstacle-free footpaths, it restricted vendors from using the footpaths on roads built under the Tender SURE scheme. (The New Indian Express, 2014) One vendor, who had previously earned ₹3,000 a day, reported a drop to ₹500 after foot traffic was rerouted away from his stall. Although the Tender SURE guidelines briefly acknowledged the possibility of hawking zones, the plans made no serious attempt to include vendors. (The Guardian, 2015). The BBMP Commissioner at the time stated that the needs of one crore pedestrians outweighed those of one lakh vendors, a view that cast informal workers as expendable rather than integral to the city (WIEGO, 2022).
These cases demonstrate that, although the context may vary, the structural pattern remains: cities are upgrading their infrastructure without integrating the informal economy. In a few instances, pressure from the streets or shifts in political priorities has led to limited course corrections. However, without proactive and inclusive planning, informal workers continue to bear the brunt of India’s urban transformation.
From Encroachers to Stakeholders: Rethinking Urban Space
The case studies above suggest a broader reevaluation of what it means to plan a city. Indian cities have long treated informality as a sign of disorder rather than a reality to be planned for. Yet the presence of vendors, waste pickers, and other informal workers is not a temporary exception to the urban order. It is a crucial component of how cities operate. The real challenge for planners is not how to eliminate informality but how to govern it fairly.
A shift is needed in how participation is understood. Inclusion cannot stop at public hearings or token outreach. Planning should involve vendor associations, unions of waste pickers, and other informal worker organizations from the beginning. As WIEGO (2022) explains, practices such as joint mapping, co-designed rules, and direct engagement lead to policies that reflect how space is used, making them more likely to be implemented fairly.
Zoning policies also require reform. Strict, single-use models often criminalize how Indian cities function. Mixed-use areas, where people live, work, and trade in the same space, are not exceptions; they are the norm. Recognizing this through flexible zoning and designated vending areas would allow informal livelihoods to exist legally and predictably, rather than being treated as violations.
Legal frameworks are necessary but not sufficient. The Street Vendors Act, 2014, provided a strong foundation, but implementation has lagged. Many cities still lack functional Town Vending Committees, and where they exist, vendor representation is often weak or delayed. Without active local institutions, rights remain unenforced and informal workers remain vulnerable to arbitrary eviction.
Perhaps the most fundamental, cities need to shift their perception of informal workers. They are not marginal or transitional. They are central to the functioning of the urban economy. Vendors provide affordable goods and services, keep streets active and safe, and serve communities that formal systems often overlook. As one Delhi protester put it, "We are city builders, not illegals." Recognizing that fact is not only a matter of justice. It is the foundation of any urban future that aspires to be inclusive and responsive to the needs of the people.
Informal workers are not waiting to be absorbed into the future formal economy. They are already building the city through their labour. Recognizing that fact is not only a question of rights. It is a question of whether planning reflects the city as it is or only the city imagined from above.
Whose streets?
The question of who speaks for the streets in India remains a contested one. Urban planning has long privileged elites, corporations, and aesthetics over equity, but informal workers are asserting their right to be seen and heard. As India continues to urbanize, inclusive planning is no longer an optional add-on; it is essential for creating cities that work for all. Reimagining urban space means recognizing that development without dignity is displacement. Informal workers are not standing in the way of progress—they are part of it. The street is theirs, too.
Sources
Idiculla, Mathew. 2022. Urban Planning and Informal Livelihoods in India: An Analysis of Urban Planning Laws and Processes in Delhi and Bangalore. WIEGO Working Paper No. 44. Manchester, UK: WIEGO https://www.wiego.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/working%20paper-44-urban-planning-india.pdf
Street Vendor Act 2014, mohua.gov.in/upload/uploadfiles/files/StreetVendorAct2014_English(1).pdf. https://mohua.gov.in/upload/uploadfiles/files/StreetVendorAct2014_English(1).pdf
Times of India, “Delhi HC Seeks Status on Formation of Town Vending Committee: Delhi News.” The Times of India, TOI, https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/hc-seeks-status-on-formation-of-town-vending-committee/articleshow/97260992.cms
Pti. “Delhi Street Vendors Allege Illegal Evictions despite Valid Vending Certificates.” ThePrint, 19 May 2025, https://theprint.in/india/delhi-street-vendors-allege-illegal-evictions-despite-valid-vending-certificates/2631051/
Bose, Nayonika. “‘illegal Hawkers’ Livelihoods Lost amid BMC Crackdown, What’s The Way Forward?” The Indian Express, 26 Aug. 2024, https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/mumbai/mumbai-hardlook-livelihoods-lost-as-bmc-cracks-down-on-illegal-hawkers-9533275/
Sripad, Ashwini M. “Street Vendors Prohibited from Using Footpaths on Tender Sure Roads.” The New Indian Express, www.newindianexpress.com/cities/bengaluru/2014/Dec/22/street-vendors-prohibited-from-using-footpaths-on-tender-sure-roads-697041.html.
Mitra, Atri, and Sweety Kumari. “West Bengal CM Mamata Banerjee Suspends Eviction Drive for a Month, Asks to Identify Hawker Zone.” The Indian Express, 27 June 2024, indianexpress.com/article/cities/kolkata/mamata-banerjee-eviction-drive-hawker-9418510/.
Rao, Kavitha. “Could a New Pavement Design Give Walking Culture a Foothold in Bangalore?” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 15 July 2015, www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/jul/15/bangalore-new-pavement-road-design-walkable-traffic-pedestrian.