Delhi High Court

Mobile street vendors using gas cylinders are exempt from the thirty-minute stay restriction for vending.

Mukesh Kumar vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi And Ors

Delhi High CourtJUDGMENT: March 30, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

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. 2

The 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. 2

The MCD contended that the Petitioner is a mobile vendor and is bound by the restrictive conditions of the CoV

Source reference: p. 2
02

Issues

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. 3-4
03

Law 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. 4

The 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. 3-4

Section 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. 5
04

Reasoning

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. 2

The 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. 3-4

Aligning 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. 4

The 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. 5
05

Holding

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. 4-5

These 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. 5
Delhi High Court

Original Court PDF

Mukesh KumarvsMunicipal Corporation Of Delhi And Ors

Delhi High Court · March 30, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment