Street vendors with three pre-survey challans are entitled to consideration for inclusion in vending certificate lists.

The Petitioner, Anita Devi, sought directions for the Respondents to grant her a Certificate of Vending (COV) based on representations made on May 13, 2025, and November 11, 2025

She claimed to be a street vendor operating near Pillar No. 80, Dhaula Kuan, for over six years but was excluded from the Delhi Cantonment Board’s (DCB) initial survey

To prove her long-term presence, she relied on challans issued prior to 2023

The Petitioner noted that several challans from 2019 and 2021 were in the name of her late husband, Mr. Nekpal, who passed away in 2023, while a 2025 challan was in her own name

She alleged that, in the absence of a COV, she was being prevented from vending at the site

Whether the Petitioner’s case for a Certificate of Vending should be considered by the Delhi Cantonment Board based on challans issued prior to the commencement of the street vendor survey

The Court primarily applied the resolution passed by the Town Vending Committee (TVC) in its meeting dated January 15, 2026

This resolution established that vendors capable of producing at least three challans issued by the Delhi Cantonment Board prior to the survey commencement date of October 27, 2023, would be considered for inclusion in the list of street vendors, subject to holding capacity

the resolution mandated that holders of temporary certificates or those meeting the criteria should not be evicted until the finalization of vending zones

The Court also relied on its own precedent in Danveer Yadav v. Delhi Cantonment Board, W.P.(C) 2667/2026, which directed the DCB to examine similar claims within a specific timeframe

The Court examined the Petitioner’s evidence, noting the existence of challans dated July 16, 2019, and February 5, 2021

Although these were in her late husband's name, they supported the claim of long-term vending at the site

The Court observed that the DCB’s own TVC resolution dated January 15, 2026, was designed to protect and verify the status of vendors who possessed pre-survey challans

By applying the principle of consistency with the Danveer Yadav decision, the Court reasoned that the Petitioner's representation required a formal evaluation by the TVC/DCB to determine if her history of vending (including that of her predecessor husband) met the eligibility criteria for a COV

The Court ordered that the decision must be communicated to the Petitioner within one month from the date of the order

All pending applications were also disposed of accordingly