Facts
The Petitioner, a person with 50% locomotor disability holding a disability certificate, operated a vending cart selling snacks and drinks at a site near the Indian Oil petrol pump, Sarai Kale Khan
Source reference: p. 1, para. 2; p. 2, para. 3He holds a provisional Certificate of Vending (CoV) under the category "Food/Snack with gas cylinder/fire" for Ward S-56, Central Zone
Source reference: p. 2, para. 4On April 6, 2026, the Health Inspector of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) seized his cart and goods
Source reference: p. 2, para. 5The MCD argued the seizure was necessary due to haphazard vending causing severe traffic congestion on the Ring Road
Source reference: p. 2, para. 6; p. 6, para. 8The Petitioner sought the release of his goods and the right to vend peacefully
Source reference: p. 1, para. 2Issues
1. Whether a street vendor with a valid provisional Certificate of Vending (CoV) can be restrained from vending due to traffic congestion in a specific area
Source reference: p. 6-7, paras. 9-102. Whether the MCD is obligated to provide an alternative vending space or return seized goods to a disabled vendor holding a valid CoV
Source reference: p. 7-8, paras. 10-12Law Applied
Article 226 of the Constitution of India regarding the High Court's writ jurisdiction
Source reference: p. 1, para. 2legal framework governing street vending and the conditions attached to a Certificate of Vending (CoV)
Source reference: p. 2, para. 4principles from its own precedents in Mohd Badruddin v. MCD, Rajendra Singh v. Commissioner of Police, and Rihana v. MCD, which established that vendors in the "Food/Snack with gas cylinder/fire" category are permitted to operate subject to specific safety, space, and hygiene conditions, effectively superseding standard restrictive CoV clauses
Source reference: p. 6-7, para. 9Reasoning
The Court balanced the Petitioner’s right to livelihood as a disabled person holding a valid CoV against the MCD’s concerns regarding public order and traffic congestion on the Ring Road
Source reference: p. 6, para. 9-10It noted that while the Petitioner has a right to vend, the photographs provided by the MCD illustrated significant obstruction
Source reference: p. 2, para. 7Consequently, the Court applied a set of six restrictive conditions—including the use of small gas cylinders, restriction to a specific space without encroaching on pedestrian paths, and maintenance of hygiene—to allow the Petitioner to vend without aggravating the traffic situation
Source reference: p. 7, para. 9Because the Petitioner’s disability limits his mobility, the Court reasoned that he could not be expected to move frequently, yet his current location on a major arterial road necessitated administrative intervention to identify a more suitable, non-obstructive spot within the same ward
Source reference: p. 6, para. 9; p. 7, para. 10Holding
The Court disposed of the petition by directing the Assistant Commissioner (MCD) to identify a specific, appropriate space for the Petitioner to vend from, while taking into account traffic concerns
The Court ordered the Petitioner to appear before the Assistant Commissioner on April 27, 2026, to request the return of his seized cart and items. The Petitioner was granted permission to vend subject to six conditions: use of small cylinders only, no encroachment on pedestrian areas, maintenance of hygiene/dustbins, no sub-letting, no permanent construction, and the non-applicability of Condition No. 11 of the CoV
Source reference: p. 7, para. 11; p. 6-7, para. 9Original Court PDF
Umesh ChaudharyvsMunicipal Corporation Of Delhi And Ors
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in