Vishnu Kumar vs New Delhi Municipal Council & Ors.

$~22
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
TH
Date of Decision: 6 November, 2026
th
Uploaded On: 10 November, 2026
# CNR No. DLHC010544432026
+ W.P.(C) 16736/2026 & CM APPL. 78364/2026
VISHNU KUMAR .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Satish Kumar Tripathi, Adv with
petitioner in person.

versus

NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Sriharsha Peechara Standing
Counsel for NDMC Mr Karthik Dabas
ASC Mr Soumit Ganguli Ms Ravicha
Sharma Mr Akash Sharma Advocates.
Mr. Anshveer Singh Nalwa, Adv. For
Sarojini Market Shopkeepers
Association.


CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUSTICE DINESH BHATT

Prathiba M. Singh, J. (ORAL)

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner under Article 226
of the Constitution of India, inter alia , seeking issuance of an appropriate writ
directing the Respondents to allot a permanent vending site to the Petitioner.
3. The Petitioner has been issued a provisional certificate of vending
(hereinafter, ‘CoV’ ) bearing Vendor Id:V2025702663 under the category of
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:RAHUL
Signing Date:10.11.2026
19:49:47
W.P.(C) 16736/2026 Page 1 of 5

‘Others’ in the Sarojini Nagar area.
4. The case of the Petitioner is that he has several challans specifically
showing that he is squatting Opposite Shop No.137, Sarojini Nagar, New
Delhi. It is the submission of ld. Counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner
should be permitted to vend in front of the said shop itself. The photographs
placed on record by the Petitioner are as under:-

Signature Not Verified
Signed By:RAHUL
Signing Date:10.11.2026
19:49:47
W.P.(C) 16736/2026 Page 2 of 5

Signature Not Verified
Signed By:RAHUL
Signing Date:10.11.2026
19:49:47
W.P.(C) 16736/2026 Page 3 of 5

5. Ld. Counsel for the Market Association submits that the name of the
Petitioner does not appear in the list of surveyed persons though he has a
provisional CoV. Further, the number of squatters/vendors in Sarojini Nagar
Market has already reached a saturation.
6. On behalf of the New Delhi Municipal Council (hereinafter, ‘NDMC’ ),
Mr. Sriharsha Peechara, ld. Standing Counsel submits that the Petitioner may
be permitted to operate as a mobile vendor.
7. The Court has considered the matter and even the images which have
been placed by the Petitioner on record. The Sarojini Nagar Market has
become extremely crowded and the perusal of the provisional CoV would
show that the same is issued for vending in general in the Sarojini Nagar area.
Unfortunately, the Petitioner’s name is not in the list of 628 vendors though
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:RAHUL
Signing Date:10.11.2026
19:49:47
W.P.(C) 16736/2026 Page 4 of 5

he claims to have challans for the last several years.
8. Under these circumstances, the allotment of a particular site would be
within the domain of the TVC-II. However, the Petitioner in terms of the
provisional CoV and the terms and conditions of the vending shall be
permitted to vend as a mobile vendor in the Sarojini Nagar area.
9. TVC-II shall, after constitution, take a decision on the Petitioner’s
representation for identifying a specific site within a period of three months.
10. The petition is disposed of with these terms. All pending applications
are also disposed of.


PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUDGE



DINESH BHATT
JUDGE

NOVEMBER 6, 2026/MR/ck
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:RAHUL
Signing Date:10.11.2026
19:49:47
W.P.(C) 16736/2026 Page 5 of 5