Facts
The Petitioner, a street vendor, was issued a Certificate of Vending (CoV) by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) under the category ‘Food/Snacks with gas cylinder/fire’ for a specific location at M Block Road, Greater Kailash-II
Source reference: p. 2The Petitioner approached the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, alleging constant harassment by Police and MCD officials despite holding a valid CoV
Source reference: p. 2The MCD contended that the Petitioner is a mobile vendor and is bound by the restrictive conditions of the CoV
Source reference: p. 2Issues
1. Whether Condition No. 11 of the Certificate of Vending, which limits a mobile vendor’s stay at a single spot to 30 minutes, is applicable to the Petitioner given his specific vending category
Source reference: p. 3-4Law Applied
Condition No. 11 of the Certificate of Vending, which restricts mobile vendors from staying in one spot for more than 30 minutes
Source reference: p. 4The legal principles established in Mohd Badruddin v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors. [W.P.(C) 19391/2025], Rajendra Singh v. Commissioner of Police and Ors., and Rihana v. MCD & Ors., which provide exemptions from temporal restrictions for vendors whose trade requires specific equipment like gas cylinders
Source reference: p. 3-4Section 21 of the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014, regarding the authority of the Town Vending Committee (TVC)
Source reference: p. 5Reasoning
The Court examined the Petitioner’s CoV and photographic evidence of his vending cart, noting that he was authorized to sell food items using a gas cylinder
Source reference: p. 2The Court reasoned that for a vendor in this specific category, the 30-minute restriction stipulated in Condition No. 11 is impractical and inconsistent with the nature of the permitted trade
Source reference: p. 3-4Aligning with recent precedents, the Court determined that as long as the Petitioner uses a small/medium cylinder, maintains hygiene, and does not obstruct pedestrian movement, the strict time limit of Condition No. 11 should be waived
Source reference: p. 4The Court emphasized that this relief does not grant a vested right to a permanent spot and remains subject to future planning by the Town Vending Committee
Source reference: p. 5Holding
The Court disposed of the petition by exempting the Petitioner from Condition No. 11 of the CoV
It directed that: (a) the Petitioner may operate at his designated spot using a small/medium cylinder; (b) he must not encroach upon pedestrian areas; (c) he must maintain hygiene and use a dustbin; (d) he is prohibited from sub-letting or creating third-party interests; and (e) no permanent or temporary construction shall be erected
Source reference: p. 4-5These directions are subject to the eventual vending plan formulated by the Town Vending Committee–II under Section 21 of the Street Vendors Act, 2014
Source reference: p. 5Acts & Sections Cited
1 provisions across 1 statute referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.
Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 20141
Original Court PDF
Mukesh KumarvsMunicipal Corporation Of Delhi And Ors
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
