Om Prakash vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi And Ors
- Court
- Delhi High Court
- Case type
- Writ Petition Civil
- Decided on
- 12-03-2026
$~2
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHIAT NEW DELHI
th
Date of decision: 12 March, 2026
th
Uploaded on: 17 March, 2026
+ W.P.(C) 19794/2025 & CM APPL. 82674/2025
OM PRAKASH .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Mishra, Ms.
Renu, Mr. Swagat and Ms. Mansi,
Advs.
versus
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI AND ORS
.....Respondents
Through: Ms. Namrata Mukim, SC, MCD with
Ms. Niharika Singh and Ms. Sakshi
Saxena, Advs. for MCD
Mr. Anubhav Tyagi, SPC with Mr.
Partha Sharma, Adv. for R3 & R4.
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUSTICE MADHU JAIN
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioners under Article 226
of the Constitution of India, inter alia , seeking directions to the Respondents
to allow the Petitioner to peacefully vend at his designated spot i.e.,
Meharchand Market, Lodhi Road, under the name of ‘Chauhan Ji Chole
Bhature, Harijan Camp, Delhi Civil Lines, Central Delhi-110003’ .
3. The background of this case is that the Petitioner is stated to be a street
vendor at Meharchand Market, Lodhi Road, running a vend under the name
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:RENUKA
NEGI
Signing Date:17.03.2026
19:55:26
W.P.(C) 19794/2025 Page 1 of 10
of ‘Chauhan Ji Chole Bhature Harijan Camp, Delhi Civil Lines, Central
Delhi-110003’ . It is his case that he has been vending since 2005. The further
case of the Petitioner is that he is also registered with the UDYAM, a scheme
run by the Ministry of Small and Medium Enterprises (hereinafter, ‘MSME’ ).
A Certificate of Vending (hereinafter, ‘CoV’ ) has been issued to the Petitioner
bearing URI No. 9808109 under the category ‘Food/ Snack with gas cylinder/
Fire’ . The Petitioner has other registrations under Food Safety and Standards
Authority of India, etc., including challans issued by the Municipal
Corporation of Delhi (hereinafter, ‘MCD’ ).
4. The case of the Petitioner is that he had to make representations in
December, 2025 as he was being harassed by the officials of MCD and the
Delhi Police. Rights under the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and
Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014 are being claimed by the Petitioner.
th
5. The Court had, vide order dated 24 December, 2025, granted the last
chance of four weeks, considering the photographs which were filed by the
Respondents. The relevant portion of the said order reads as under:
“At the request of counsel for petitioner, we grant 4 weeks’ time by
way of last chance.
2. Photographs handed up by counsel for respondent are taken on
record, copies of the same has been made available to counsel
appearing for petitioner ”
nd
6. On 2 February, 2026, early hearing was sought which was rejected.
7. Today, photographs of the Petitioner’s vend have been presented by
Mr. Mishra, ld. Counsel for the Petitioner which are extracted below:
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:RENUKA
NEGI
Signing Date:17.03.2026
19:55:26
W.P.(C) 19794/2025 Page 2 of 10
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:RENUKA
NEGI
Signing Date:17.03.2026
19:55:26
W.P.(C) 19794/2025 Page 3 of 10
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:RENUKA
NEGI
Signing Date:17.03.2026
19:55:26
W.P.(C) 19794/2025 Page 4 of 10
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:RENUKA
NEGI
Signing Date:17.03.2026
19:55:26
W.P.(C) 19794/2025 Page 5 of 10
8. On the other hand, Ms. Mukim, ld. Standing Counsel for MCD, has
produced a video as of this morning which shows complete encroachment of
the footpath by the Petitioner by adding additional tables in the side and in
front of the cart and by allowing parking of vehicles in front of his cart in a
manner so as to obstruct vehicular traffic and pedestrians’ pathway.
9. The photographs given by the Petitioner when compared with the video
given by Ms. Mukim, ld. Counsel shows a completely stark difference in the
manner in which the Petitioner is operating the vend. The Petitioner is in
effect, running a small restaurant itself on the footpath which would be
impermissible in terms of the CoV, as the Petitioner can only be a mobile
vendor.
10. Mr. Mishra, ld. Counsel for the Petitioner prays for parity with other
similarly placed vendors for whom Condition No. 11 of the CoV has been
waived.
11. In the opinion of this Court, the Petitioner ought to have come with
clean hands in order to seek relief. The photographs filed by the Petitioner are
completely misleading and are contrary to the video which has been produced
by the ld. Counsel for the MCD.
12. The Petitioner appears to have deliberately removed the side table and
the front tables before clicking the pictures, whereas, the live vend which is
being run in the video makes it clear that the Petitioner has encroached upon
a much larger portion of the area.
13. This Court has repeatedly emphasized that persons who are vending
and holding Tehbazari licences or CoVs, have to maintain cleanliness and
cannot encroach upon public roads and public pathways in the manner as is
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:RENUKA
NEGI
Signing Date:17.03.2026
19:55:26
W.P.(C) 19794/2025 Page 6 of 10
being currently done.
14. The Petitioner is one such vendor who has completely violated all the
conditions which are imposed in the CoV.
15. Mr. Mishra, ld. Counsel for the Petitioner has sought to raise a doubt to
the video, which was produced by the MCD.
16. Ms. Mukim, ld. Counsel for the MCD, thereafter, through an official of
the MCD has produced the live video of the area, which shows that the place
is completely littered with garbage. There are several tables where the
customers are eating the food. The entire footpath is completely covered.
Half the road in front of the cart is encroached. It is clear that the photographs
filed by the Petitioner are completely deceptive. Relevant images from the
live video shown to the Court are as under:
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:RENUKA
NEGI
Signing Date:17.03.2026
19:55:26
W.P.(C) 19794/2025 Page 7 of 10
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:RENUKA
NEGI
Signing Date:17.03.2026
19:55:26
W.P.(C) 19794/2025 Page 8 of 10
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:RENUKA
NEGI
Signing Date:17.03.2026
19:55:26
W.P.(C) 19794/2025 Page 9 of 10
17. Clearly the Petitioner is in violation of various terms and conditions of
the Certificate of Vending issued to him. The relief sought is that the
Petitioner’s peaceful vending ought not to be disturbed – which is a relief that
cannot be granted when the Petitioner is in violation of the vending
conditions. Under these circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant any
relief to the Petitioner. The Petitioner is also guilty of having misleading this
Court by presenting ‘dressed-up’ images of his cart/vend when the reality was
completely to the contrary. The petition is dismissed with costs of Rs.
10,000/- to be paid to the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee. The
bank details of the Delhi High Court Legal Service Committee are as under:
● Name: Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee
● Account No: 15530110008386
● IFSC Code: UCBA0001553
● Bank and Branch: UCO Bank, Delhi High Court
18. The MCD is free to take action against the Petitioner in accordance with
law.
19. The video, which was shown to the Court and the live video, shall be
submitted to the Court Master and the same shall be tagged with the electronic
record of the Court, by the Registry.
20. Pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUDGE
MADHU JAIN
JUDGE
MARCH 12, 2026/ b/ck
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:RENUKA
NEGI
Signing Date:17.03.2026
19:55:26
W.P.(C) 19794/2025 Page 10 of 10