Facts
The Petitioner, a street vendor selling tea and snacks, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking directions to the Respondents to allow him to peacefully vend at a specific site in M-Block Market, Greater Kailash-1, South Zone
Source reference: p. 1-2The Petitioner holds a provisional Certificate of Vending (CoV) under the category ‘Others’
Source reference: p. 2The Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) opposed the petition, presenting evidence that the Petitioner was operating a stationary vend with permanent structures rather than a mobile vend, causing traffic congestion and blocking a parking entrance
Source reference: p. 3Photographs submitted by the MCD also indicated a lack of hygiene and significant clutter at the site
Source reference: p. 4-6Issues
1. Whether a street vendor issued a provisional CoV as a mobile vendor is entitled to operate a stationary vend with permanent structures
Source reference: p. 6, para. 8-92. Whether the Petitioner is entitled to protection for vending activities that cause traffic disruption and fail to maintain hygiene
Source reference: p. 3, para. 5; p. 6, para. 7Law Applied
The Court applied the terms and conditions stipulated in the provisional Certificate of Vending (CoV) issued under the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act.
Source reference: no citationSpecifically, the Court relied on Condition No. 11 of the CoV, which mandates that mobile vendors shall not stay or vend for more than 30 minutes at one place
Source reference: p. 6, para. 8the Court upheld the principle that the right to vend is subject to reasonable restrictions, including the maintenance of public health, hygiene, and the prevention of traffic obstruction
Source reference: p. 6, para. 10Reasoning
The Court analyzed the photographs provided by both the Petitioner and the MCD, concluding that the Petitioner was operating a stationary, permanent structure rather than a mobile operation
Source reference: p. 3-6By staying in one position and creating clutter, the Petitioner violated Condition No. 11 of the provisional CoV, which restricts a mobile vendor's dwell time to 30 minutes
Source reference: p. 6The Court noted that the Petitioner’s activities led to traffic congestion and environmental degradation, which are inconsistent with the duties of a certificate holder
Source reference: p. 3, 6Additionally, since the Petitioner’s CoV was under the category ‘Others’, the Court determined that the use of gas cylinders was unauthorized for his specific vending type
Source reference: p. 6, para. 10Holding
The Court held that the Petitioner is only permitted to operate as a mobile vendor in strict accordance with the provisional CoV
The Court directed that the Petitioner must not remain stationary beyond the prescribed time, must maintain cleanliness and hygiene, and is prohibited from using gas cylinders
Source reference: p. 6, para. 10Subject to these conditions and compliance with the CoV, the Petitioner is allowed to peacefully vend
Source reference: p. 6, para. 11The petition was disposed of with these directions
Source reference: p. 6, para. 12Original Court PDF
Sunil Kumar GandhivsMunicipal Corporation Of Delhi And Ors
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in