Palika Bazaar Vendor Gets A Month To Fix Documents For Eligible-List Entry, But Delhi HC Bars Vending There

In brief

The question

Whether the NDMC should communicate the petitioner’s document deficiency and permit him to rectify it before determining his inclusion in the eligible-vendor list.

The court held

The Court disposed of the petition by directing the NDMC to communicate any document deficiency, allowing the petitioner one month to rectify it, and requiring inclusion in the eligible-vendor list upon rectification.

It also directed

The petitioner was directed to appear before the Joint Director, Town Vending Committee-II, on 18 November 2026 for removal of the deficiency; any provisional CoV would follow verification of eligibility.

He was prohibited from vending at Palika Bazar and could vend only at an alternate site allotted by the NDMC, including Laxmi Bai Nagar.

01Facts

The petitioner, who claimed to vend from Gate No. 2, Palika Bazar, had previously been recorded at serial no. 268 in a list of 628 vendors prepared by the NDMC pursuant to a Supreme Court order.

p. 4

In an earlier writ petition, the Court directed that, subject to verification, he could participate in the vendor survey, with his seniority taken into account, and that the NDMC consider allotting him an alternate site.

pp. 3–4

After participating in the survey, the petitioner filed this third writ petition seeking correction of a deficiency in the eligibility process and issuance of a Certificate of Vending (CoV).

p. 4

The NDMC stated that he had not been included in the eligible-vendor list because of deficiencies in his documents.

p. 4

02Issues

i.Whether the NDMC should communicate the petitioner’s document deficiency and permit him to rectify it before determining his inclusion in the eligible-vendor list.

p. 4

ii.Whether the petitioner was entitled to issuance of a CoV, and whether he could continue vending at Palika Bazar.

pp. 4–5

03Law Applied

The petition was brought under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

p. 2

The Court applied its prior order in the petitioner’s earlier writ petition, which permitted his participation in the survey subject to verification and required his seniority to be considered in relation to an alternate site.

pp. 3–4

The Court further treated verification of eligibility as a prerequisite to inclusion in the eligible-vendor list and to issuance of a provisional CoV; issuance of the CoV was within the domain of the Town Vending Committee-II.

p. 5

The Court also proceeded on the stated position that Palika Bazar is a No-Vending Zone.

p. 5

04Reasoning

The petitioner had participated in the survey, and the earlier order had already recognised his right to participate subject to verification.

p. 4

Since the NDMC identified a deficiency in his documents, the Court directed that the deficiency be communicated and allowed the petitioner one month to rectify it; upon rectification, his name was to be included in the eligible-vendor list.

p. 4

The Court did not direct immediate issuance of a CoV, leaving that decision to Town Vending Committee-II after eligibility verification.

p. 5

Because Palika Bazar was a No-Vending Zone, the petitioner could not vend there and was confined to an alternate site allotted by the NDMC.

p. 5