Kochi corporation starts distributing kiosks to rehabilitate street vendors
Kochi: As part of a move to rehabilitate street vendors in the city, the Kochi corporation started distributing kiosks, designed and procured by Cochin Smart Mission Limited, to them.
On Tuesday, 56 vendors in Fort Kochi received kiosks.
"The corporation is conducting the activities according to the 2014 Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act. The act specifies the identification, registration of vendors and establishment of vending zones. The elected town vending committee plays a crucial role in implementing the law. As per the law's recommendation, a survey was conducted with the help of various agencies, identifying 2,351 street vendors within the corporation limits.
A total of 69 vending zones have been approved to rehabilitate them," mayor M Anilkumar said.
By law, it was mandatory for municipalities to have a specific vending bylaw. Councillors P S Viju, Priya Prashanth, Antony Kureethra and Minimol V K were tasked with preparing the bylaw. The draft bylaw was then submitted to the govt with the approval of the town vending committee and the corporation council and received govt approval on Oct 9, 2023.
The vending plan was approved by the govt on June 27, 2024.
"It is a matter of pride that Kochi is the first in Kerala's urban local bodies to have an approved street vending bylaw, vending plan and recognised vending zones. The bylaw prepared by the corporation now serves as a guide for other municipalities," Anilkumar said.
The distribution of kiosks was inaugurated by the mayor at a ceremony presided over by deputy mayor K A Ansiya.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NDTV
33 minutes ago
- NDTV
Thane Investment Firm Accused Of Cheating 78 Investors Of Rs 3.7 Crore
Thane: Thane police have registered a case against eight individuals associated with an investment firm for allegedly cheating 78 investors of Rs 3.7 crore after promising them high returns, officials said on Thursday. The firm opened its office in Dombivli area of Maharashtra's Thane district some years back and began marketing various investment schemes which promised lucrative interest rates. The accused, including partners and employees of the firm, lured people to invest money for good returns, an official The victims invested money in the firm's schemes between 2021 and 2022. "The accused issued certificates to investors, acknowledging their investments and promising attractive returns. However, after receiving the funds, they failed to deliver the agreed interest and also did not return the principal amount to the investors," the official said. One of the 78 victims subsequently lodged a police complaint on behalf of the group. The police on Tuesday registered an FIR against eight persons associated with the firm under sections 420 (cheating), 406 (criminal breach of trust) and 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code, and provisions of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, the official said. "We are currently probing the case. As of now, no arrest has been made, but all the accused have been identified and we are verifying the financial trail. Action will be taken as per law once we complete the preliminary inquiry," the official added.
Time of India
4 hours ago
- Time of India
Builder liable to register villa owners' association: Telangana RERA
HYDERABAD : The Telangana Real Estate Regulatory Authority ( TG-RERA ) has directed Prime Infratech , promoter of Prime Alpenia villa project in Mokila , to facilitate registration of a formal association of allottees within 45 days. The directive, issued on June 4, followed a complaint by a villa owner alleging continued harassment and illegal fund collection in the absence of a registered society. In his complaint, Budi Venkata Ramana, who resides in LB Nagar, said that he had purchased a villa in the project in Dec 2021 and despite paying Rs 3,41,000 for corpus and maintenance charges in Feb 2022, the promised registered villa owners' association was never formed. The villa remained unoccupied until April 2024 and was let out from May 1, 2024. In June and July 2023, he paid maintenance to one of the respondents based on an oral assurance that the society would soon be registered. However, he refused to continue payments to the unregistered group and notified the respondents in March 2024 through a legal notice that he would only pay a legally recognised society. Despite this, he claimed he was coerced into paying Rs 76,725 and that both he and his tenant faced threats, including possible utility disconnection. The authority ruled that the promoter failed to discharge the statutory duty under Section 11(4)(e) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, which mandates enabling the formation of an association or society of allottees. This failure, it observed, directly impairs the rights of buyers and falls well within its regulatory scope. The claim by the promoter that a group of residents voluntarily managing the premises absolves it of responsibility was rejected. The duty to initiate and facilitate a registered association was termed a binding legal obligation, not a discretionary act. Respondents managing the unregistered group argued that they were collecting maintenance to ensure the upkeep of common areas, citing collective decision-making by residents. However, the authority clarified that disputes between residents or unregistered groups do not fall under its jurisdiction. It noted that Ramana had already approached the Telangana Co-operative Department in Oct 2024, which is the competent forum to address such internal matters. TG-RERA reiterated that the obligation to form a registered association and to hand over common areas was not optional. Any continued failure in this regard would invite regulatory consequences under Section 63 of the RE(R&D) Act. Simultaneously, it also held that the complainant was legally required to pay maintenance charges under Section 19(6), regardless of whether the villa was occupied, since the obligation was based on possession and not on actual use.
Time of India
10 hours ago
- Time of India
HC orders refund of input tax credit on closure of operations
MUMBAI: The Sikkim high court has ruled that businesses are entitled to a refund of unutilised input tax credit (ITC) even upon the discontinuation or closure of operations. The order follows a writ petition filed by SICPA India, a private limited company, which had sought a refund of about Rs 4.4 crore in unutilised ITC after ceasing its manufacturing activities in Sikkim. SICPA, which was a manufacturer of security inks and solutions, had decided to discontinue its Sikkim operations in Jan 2019, selling off its machinery and facilities by March 2020. The company had appropriately reversed ITC on asset sales but was left with a significant unutilised balance in its electronic credit ledger. The company challenged earlier orders from the assistant commissioner and the appellate authority, which had rejected SICPA India's refund application. The authorities had maintained that Section 54(3) of the CGST Act, 2017, limits ITC refunds to only two specific circumstances, neither of which includes business closure. However, SICPA argued that section 49(6) of the CGST Act provides for the refund of balances in the electronic credit ledger, subject to Section 54. They contended that the exceptions carved out in Section 54(3) cannot negate a vested right to ITC and its refund. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Buy Brass Idols - Handmade Brass Statues for Home & Gifting Luxeartisanship Buy Now Undo Ankit Kanodia, one of the advocates which represented the company told TOI, "The HC examined the provisions of Sections 49(6) and 54(3) of the CGST Act and relevant case laws, including that of the Karnataka HC, in the case of Slovak India Trading, where refunds of unutilised credit were allowed upon business closure. The HC held that there is no express prohibition in the CGST Act against refunding unutilised ITC upon business closure and that retention of tax without authority of law is impermissible. " The judgment stated, "Although, Section 54(3) of the CGST Act deals only with two circumstances where refunds can be made, however the statute also does not provide for retention of tax without the authority of law." Consequently, in a significant judgment, the HC held that SICPA is entitled to the refund of unutilised ITC claimed by them. Stay informed with the latest business news, updates on bank holidays and public holidays . AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
