Facts
The five Petitioners were issued Certificates of Vending (CoV) under the ‘Others’ category for the Central Zone, Ward S-56
Source reference: p. 1-2They claimed to be vending in the Sarai Kale Khan area, specifically from the Namo Bharat Rapid Station to Metro Gate Nos. 2-3
Source reference: p. 2The Petitioners alleged that despite holding valid CoVs, they were being prevented from peaceful vending and that their representations to the Town Vending Committee (TVC), dated March 30, 2026, remained unconsidered
Source reference: p. 6Conversely, the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) contended that the Petitioners were maintaining stationary vends in violation of CoV Condition No. 11 and that a Co-ordinate Bench had previously ordered the removal of illegal encroachments in that specific area on February 20, 2026
Source reference: p. 6-7Issues
1. Whether the Petitioners are entitled to protection from interference in their vending activities while operating under the terms and conditions of their Certificates of Vending (CoV)
Source reference: p. 92. Whether the Petitioners’ stationary vending at the Sarai Kale Khan area violates the Delhi Street Vendors Scheme and the specific conditions of their CoVs
Source reference: p. 7Law Applied
The court applied the Delhi Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Scheme, 2019
Source reference: p. 8Condition No. 11 of the Terms & Conditions of the Vending Certificate, which stipulates that mobile vendors shall not remain stationary for more than 30 minutes at any single location in a vending zone
Source reference: p. 8The court adhered to the judicial mandate established in Sudhir Kumar Ojha v. MCD & Ors. (W.P.(C) 18987/25), which directed the removal of unauthorized encroachments to prevent traffic disruption and passenger inconvenience at transport hubs
Source reference: p. 8-9Reasoning
The Court balanced the Petitioners' right to vend under the granted CoVs against the statutory obligations and previous judicial orders aimed at maintaining public order.
Source reference: p. 2-7The Court observed that while the Petitioners possessed CoVs, the photographs and MCD submissions suggested they were operating as stationary vendors rather than mobile ones
Source reference: p. 2-7The Court emphasized that a CoV is not an absolute right to occupy a specific spot but is subject to 16 specific conditions, notably prohibitions against blocking footpaths (Condition 12), constructing permanent structures (Condition 14), and staying stationary for over 30 minutes (Condition 11)
Source reference: p. 7-8The Court reasoned that the Petitioners' right to livelihood must harmonize with the February 20, 2026, direction to clear the Sarai Kale Khan area of hindrances
Source reference: p. 9Consequently, the Court found that the Petitioners could only claim protection if they strictly transitioned to a mobile vending model as dictated by their certificates.
Source reference: p. 9Holding
The Court disposed of the petition by directing that the Petitioners shall not be disturbed in their vending process provided they strictly adhere to the CoV terms and operate only as mobile vendors for their licensed items
Any violation allows the MCD or Police to take "stringent action"
Source reference: p. 9The Court further directed the Town Vending Committee-II to consider the Petitioners' pending representations once the committee is formally constituted
Source reference: p. 9Original Court PDF
Jugal Kishore Soni And Ors.vsMunicipal Corporation Of Delhi
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in