Facts
The Petitioner, a street vendor selling water and cold drinks at the Old Lajpat Rai Market in New Delhi, filed a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
Source reference: p.1, para 2The Petitioner holds a provisional Certificate of Vending (CoV) for City-SP Zone, Ward-84-N
Source reference: p.3, para 6He alleged that officials from the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) and the Delhi Police were harassing him and preventing him from vending at his site
Source reference: p.2, para 5The Petitioner sought directions to allow him to vend peacefully
Source reference: p.1, para 2Issues
1. Whether the Petitioner is entitled to protection from interference by authorities while vending at the specified site
Source reference: p.1, para 2; p.3, para 92. Whether the Petitioner, as a "mobile vendor," is bound by the specific temporal and spatial restrictions stipulated in his Certificate of Vending
Source reference: p.3, para 7-8Law Applied
The Court exercised its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
Source reference: p.1, para 2It applied the regulatory framework governing street vending, specifically the conditions found within the Petitioner’s provisional Certificate of Vending (CoV)
Source reference: p.3, para 6The Court relied heavily on Clause 11 of the CoV, which defines the obligations of "mobile vendors," stating they shall not vend for more than 30 minutes (or the time prescribed by the Town Vending Committee) at a single spot in a vending/squatting zone
Source reference: p.3, para 7Reasoning
The Court examined the Petitioner’s status as a "mobile vendor" under URI No. 9623753
Source reference: p.3, para 6It noted that while the Petitioner has a right to vend, this right is not absolute and is subject to the conditions of the CoV
Source reference: p.3, para 7To balance the Petitioner's right to livelihood with public order and pedestrian movement, the Court determined that the Petitioner could continue his operations only if he complied with a set of restrictive conditions
Source reference: p.3, para 8The Court reasoned that by restricting the vendor to the manner depicted in the submitted photographs, prohibiting encroachment on pedestrian areas, and enforcing the "mobile" nature of the license, the interests of both the vendor and the public could be protected
Source reference: p.3, para 8Holding
The High Court disposed of the petition by granting the Petitioner protection from being disturbed at the vending site, provided he strictly adheres to five conditions: (i) vending only in the manner depicted in the court-provided photograph; (ii) no encroachment on pedestrian areas or obstruction of movement; (iii) operating strictly as a mobile vendor; (iv) maintaining hygiene and providing a dustbin; and (v) erecting no permanent or temporary structures
If these conditions are met, the Respondents are directed not to disturb the Petitioner
Source reference: p.3, para 9Original Court PDF
Mohd AlamvsMunicipal Corporation Of Delhi And Ors
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in