Delhi High Court
Administrative and Public LawConstitutional Law

Provisional food vendors may operate with small gas cylinders, subject to safety, hygiene, and non-obstruction conditions.

Ramsewak Ray vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi And Another

Delhi High CourtJUDGMENT: September 14, 20263 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Provisional food vendors may operate with small gas cylinders, subject to safety, hygiene, and non-obstruction conditions.. Ramsewak Ray vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi And Another. Delhi High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The Petitioner, a street vendor, approached the Delhi High Court under Article 226 seeking protection to vend at Major Sudesh Marg Road, adjacent to the DESU Office, J-Block Bus Stand No. 2, Rajouri Garden, Delhi.

Source reference: p.1, para. 2

He had been issued a provisional Certificate of Vending (CoV), bearing URI No. 1512535, under the category “Food snack with gas cylinder/fire”.

Source reference: p.1, para. 3

The Petitioner operated a mobile stall mounted on a tricycle and alleged that officials of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi and the Delhi Police were unnecessarily harassing and obstructing him.

Source reference: p.2, paras. 4–5

The Court considered similar orders passed in favour of vendors operating under the same category.

Source reference: p.2, para. 7
02

Issues

1. Whether the Petitioner, holding a provisional CoV for vending food/snacks using a gas cylinder, should be permitted to continue vending at the specified site subject to compliance with the applicable conditions.

Source reference: p.2, paras. 2–3, 7–8

2. Whether the Petitioner’s vending activities should be protected from disturbance, subject to restrictions concerning public safety, hygiene, pedestrian movement, traffic, and the terms of the provisional CoV.

Source reference: pp. 3–5, paras. 8–10

3. Whether the protection granted should remain subject to any vending plan formulated by the Town Vending Committee under Section 21 of the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014.

Source reference: p.5, para. 9
03

Law Applied

The Court exercised its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution to protect the Petitioner’s livelihood while ensuring compliance with statutory and regulatory conditions governing street vending.

Source reference: p.1, para. 2

It applied the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014, particularly the framework concerning plans prepared by the Town Vending Committee under Section 21.

Source reference: p.5, para. 9

The Court also relied on the Delhi Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Scheme, 2019 and the conditions contained in the Petitioner’s provisional CoV, including requirements relating to hygiene, public health, non-obstruction of pedestrians and vehicles, prohibition on permanent or temporary structures, and compliance with the prescribed vending zone and other regulatory requirements.

Source reference: pp. 3–4, para. 8(a)

The Court followed its earlier orders in Rajendra Singh v. Commissioner of Police & Ors., W.P.(C) 15082/2025, order dated 2 February 2026; Mohd. Badruddin v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors., W.P.(C) 19391/2025, order dated 8 January 2026; and Rihana v. MCD & Ors., W.P.(C) 1609/2026, order dated 5 February 2026, concerning similarly situated food and snack vendors using gas cylinders.

Source reference: p.2, para. 7
04

Reasoning

The Court balanced the Petitioner’s livelihood interest against the need to regulate vending in the interests of public safety, hygiene, pedestrian movement, and traffic.

Source reference: no citation

Since the Petitioner possessed a provisional CoV for the relevant category, the Court permitted him to operate his mobile vend, but required him to comply with all conditions of the CoV, except that Condition No. 11—limiting mobile vendors to 30 minutes or the time prescribed by the Town Vending Committee—would not apply, subject to the stated directions.

Source reference: pp. 3–5, para. 8(e)

The Court specifically restricted the Petitioner to a particular space, prohibited obstruction to pedestrians and vehicular traffic, required the use of only a small gas cylinder, and mandated cleanliness and the presence of a dustbin.

Source reference: p.4, paras. 8(b)–(d)

It further prohibited construction, sub-letting, transfer, or creation of any third-party interest in the provisional CoV.

Source reference: p.5, paras. 8(f)–(g)

The protection was expressly made subject to any future plan framed by the Town Vending Committee under Section 21 of the 2014 Act, and no vested right was recognised.

Source reference: p.5, para. 9
05

Holding

The petition was disposed of with directions permitting the Petitioner to continue vending from the specified site, subject to adherence to the provisional CoV and the additional safeguards imposed by the Court.

The Petitioner was required to use only a small gas cylinder, avoid obstruction and traffic congestion, maintain hygiene and cleanliness, keep a dustbin, refrain from constructing any structure, and not transfer or sub-let the CoV.

Source reference: pp. 4–5, para. 8

Subject to compliance, the Petitioner’s vending activities were not to be disturbed.

Source reference: p.5, paras. 10–11

The directions remained subject to any plan subsequently formulated by the Town Vending Committee under Section 21 of the 2014 Act, without creation of any vested right.

Source reference: p.5, paras. 9–11
06

Acts & 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

Delhi High Court

Original Court PDF

Ramsewak RayvsMunicipal Corporation Of Delhi And Another

Delhi High Court · September 14, 2026

Click to open original judgment

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

Click to open original judgment