Misleading the court with deceptive evidence and violating license conditions disentitles petitioners to discretionary relief.

The Petitioner, Munna Prasad, a street vendor holding a Certificate of Vending (CoV) No. 7493191 for Central Zone, Ward S-55, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution

He sought directions to the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) to permit him to vend from a site near the main gate of Mata Sushila Malhotra D.A.V. Public School

The Petitioner claimed MCD officials were obstructing his right to vend peacefully

The MCD countered this by producing photographs demonstrating that the site was heavily littered with garbage and that the vend obstructed the school’s ingress and egress, leading to formal complaints from the school administration

The Court further noted that the Petitioner’s sister had recently filed a similar petition regarding the same area, which was dismissed with costs

1. Whether the Petitioner is entitled to a direction for peaceful vending despite being in gross violation of the terms and conditions of the Certificate of Vending (CoV)

2. Whether the Petitioner is liable for costs for misleading the Court by filing "dressed-up" photographs of the vending site

The Court emphasized the principle of "clean hands," holding that a Petitioner seeking equitable relief under Article 226 must not provide misleading information or deceptive evidence

It applied the terms and conditions of the Certificate of Vending (CoV) issued under the regulatory framework for street vendors, noting that violations of these conditions forfeit the right to "peaceful vending"

The Court specifically relied on the precedent in Om Prakash v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors., W.P.(C) 19794/2025, which established that vendors using "dressed-up" images to conceal the reality of their unauthorized operations and environmental neglect are not entitled to judicial relief

The Court compared the photographs submitted by the Petitioner with those provided by the MCD, finding a "stark contrast" between the clean image presented by the Petitioner and the reality of garbage and littering shown by the Respondent

The Court observed that the Petitioner was vending in a manner that obstructed the entrance of a public school, thereby violating the fundamental conditions of the CoV and public order

In applying the Om Prakash precedent, the Court reasoned that the Petitioner had deliberately attempted to deceive the judiciary by presenting "dressed-up" images

The Court held that when a vendor is in gross contravention of license terms—specifically regarding hygiene and public obstruction—the relief of "peaceful vending" cannot be granted as the conduct itself is unlawful

The Court directed the MCD to take legal action to ensure the entrance and exit of Mata Sushila Malhotra D.A.V. Public School remain unobstructed by the Petitioner or any other vendors

While the petition was dismissed, the Petitioner was permitted to approach the Assistant Commissioner, MCD, with a fresh representation for consideration in accordance with the law

The Court imposed costs of Rs. 5,000/- on the Petitioner, payable to the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee, and stipulated that his representation to the MCD would not be considered until proof of payment was furnished