Facts
The three Petitioners, Badam Singh, Santosh Kumar, and Badlu Chauhan, are street vendors operating near Safeda Park, Mayur Vihar, Phase-3, Delhi. They approached the High Court seeking directions to prevent the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) from disturbing their vending units.
Source reference: p. 1The Petitioners possess provisional Certificates of Vending (CoV); Badam Singh and Santosh Kumar are licensed for 'Food/snack with Gas Cylinder', while Badlu Chauhan is licensed for 'Food/snack without Gas Cylinder'.
Source reference: p. 1, paras. 4-5Upon perusing photographs, the Court noted lack of cleanliness, improper dustbin placement, and potential encroachment in the vending areas.
Source reference: p. 1-4, para. 6Issues
1. Whether the Petitioners are entitled to protection against eviction or harassment by the Respondent-MCD based on their provisional Certificates of Vending.
Source reference: p. 5, paras. 7-92. Whether specific restrictions regarding hygiene, space, and equipment usage should be imposed on vendors using gas cylinders for public safety and order.
Source reference: p. 5, para. 8Law Applied
The Court's decision is anchored in the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014, specifically Section 21, which mandates the formulation of a vending plan by the Town Vending Committee (TVC).
Source reference: p. 7, para. 10The Court relied on judicial precedents, namely Rajendra Singh v. Commissioner of Police and Rihana v. MCD, which established standardized conditions for vendors using gas cylinders to ensure they do not obstruct public spaces or create safety hazards.
Source reference: p. 4, para. 7The Delhi Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Scheme, 2019, governs the mandatory conditions for hygiene and non-transferability of vending rights.
Source reference: p. 7, para. 9(xvi)Reasoning
The Court analyzed the Petitioners' rights by balancing their right to livelihood under their CoVs against public interest concerns regarding hygiene and urban mobility.
Source reference: no citationFor Petitioners using gas cylinders (Badam Singh and Santosh Kumar), the Court applied the reasoning from Rajendra Singh, determining that their operations must be restricted to small/medium cylinders to minimize space occupancy and ensure pedestrian movement is not hindered.
Source reference: p. 5, para. 8Regarding Badlu Chauhan, the Court highlighted that since his CoV specifically excludes gas usage, he must strictly adhere to the 16 standard conditions of his certificate, particularly the prohibition on permanent structures and the requirement to maintain hygiene.
Source reference: p. 5-7, para. 9The Court noted that the photographic evidence necessitated judicial intervention to enforce cleanliness and prevent encroachment on pedestrian areas.
Source reference: p. 1, para. 6; p. 5, para. 8(b)-(c)Holding
The Court disposed of the petition by granting the Petitioners protection from being disturbed in their vending activities, provided they strictly adhere to specified conditions.
Holding: (1) Badam Singh and Santosh Kumar may use only small/medium gas cylinders and must not encroach on pedestrian areas [p. 5, para. 8]. (2) Badlu Chauhan must strictly follow the 16 conditions listed in his CoV, including mobile vending restrictions [p. 5-7, para. 9]. (3) All Petitioners must maintain hygiene, ensure dustbin presence, and are barred from sub-letting or creating permanent structures.
Source reference: p. 5-6These protections are temporary and subject to the final vending plan to be framed by the Town Vending Committee-II under Section 21 of the Act.
Source reference: p. 7, para. 10Original Court PDF
Badam Singh And Ors.vsMunicipal Corporation Of Delhi
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in