MCD may relocate provisional certificate vendors to suitable areas preventing pedestrian and vehicular obstruction.

The Petitioner, a street vendor, claimed to have been vending for several years at the footpath/open space on Thekedar Surjeet Singh Marg near Gate No. 4 of GTB Nagar Metro Station, Civil Lines, New Delhi. He held a provisional Certificate of Vending (CoV), bearing URI No. 1490057, for “Food/Snack with gas cylinder/fire” in Civil Lines, Ward 14-N.

He alleged that officials of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) and the Delhi Police were repeatedly obstructing his vending activity despite the provisional CoV.

The MCD produced photographs showing substantial congestion near the metro station and submitted that the vendors would be relocated to a by-lane to keep the service lane clear for vehicular and pedestrian movement.

The Court found extreme congestion, the need for improved cleanliness and order, and that the Petitioner was occupying an area larger than permissible under the provisional CoV.

1. Whether the Petitioner, holding a provisional CoV for vending “Food/Snack with gas cylinder/fire,” was entitled to protection for peaceful vending despite the congestion at the existing vending site?

2. Whether Condition No. 11 of the provisional CoV could be relaxed or made inapplicable, subject to compliance with conditions relating to public safety, hygiene, and non-obstruction?

3. Whether the MCD could direct the Petitioner to shift to an alternate vending area identified to prevent obstruction and congestion?

The Court applied the regulatory framework under the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014, particularly the requirement that vending be regulated through the Town Vending Committee and applicable vending plans, including Section 21 concerning the scheme/plan governing street vending.

It also applied the Delhi Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Scheme, 2019, and the terms of the Petitioner’s provisional CoV, which required, inter alia, compliance with the notified vending zone and period, maintenance of hygiene, non-obstruction of pedestrian and vehicular movement, prohibition on illegal activity, prevention of permanent or temporary structures, and compliance with public-health and safety standards.

The Court relied on the approach adopted in Rajendra Singh v. Commissioner of Police & Ors., W.P.(C) 15082/2025, order dated 2 February 2026; Mohd. Badruddin v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors., W.P.(C) 19391/2025, order dated 8 January 2026; and Rihana v. MCD & Ors., W.P.(C) 1609/2026, order dated 5 February 2026, permitting regulated vending by provisional CoV holders while relaxing Condition No. 11 subject to safeguards.

The Court accepted that the Petitioner’s provisional CoV entitled him to regulated vending, but held that such entitlement could not justify vending in a manner causing congestion or obstruction.

The photographs demonstrated extreme congestion on the service lane, inadequate cleanliness, and occupation of a larger area than permissible under the CoV.

Balancing the Petitioner’s livelihood interest with the statutory objectives of orderly street vending and protection of pedestrian and vehicular movement, the Court directed the MCD Assistant Commissioner to identify a suitable alternate vending area within two weeks where only authorised provisional CoV holders could operate.

The Court further extended the safeguards applied in similar cases: use of only a small gas cylinder, operation within a confined space, maintenance of hygiene and a dustbin, and compliance with all CoV conditions other than Condition No. 11.

The relief was made subject to any future plan formulated by the Town Vending Committee under Section 21 of the 2014 Act, with no vested right being created.

Upon relocation, the Petitioner was permitted to vend subject to the terms of his provisional CoV and the additional safeguards prescribed by the Court, including use of a small gas cylinder, restriction to a designated space, maintenance of cleanliness and hygiene, and prohibition on any permanent or temporary construction or creation of third-party rights.

Condition No. 11 was held inapplicable to the Petitioner, subject to compliance with the remaining conditions and the stated safeguards.

The Petitioner was directed to approach the concerned Assistant Commissioner on 20 September 2026 at 11:30 a.m., while the jurisdictional SHO was directed to coordinate with the MCD to prevent congestion near the metro station.

The directions remained subject to the Town Vending Committee’s future vending plan, and no vested rights were created.