Surveyed street vendors entitled to provisional certificates and interim protection subject to strict spatial and hygiene conditions.

The Petitioner, a street vendor operating from a site at Rao Tularam Marg, Basant Village, Vasant Vihar, sought directions for the issuance of a Certificate of Vending (CoV) and protection from harassment by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) and Delhi Police

The Petitioner participated in a survey conducted by the Town Vending Committee (TVC), South Zone, on July 9, 2025, and was issued an acknowledgment receipt (URI No. 9371)

The MCD contended that the survey concluded in January 2026 and that provisional CoVs would be issued only after due scrutiny and verification of documents

1. Whether a street vendor who has participated in a statutory survey is entitled to an expeditious issuance of a provisional Certificate of Vending (CoV)

2. Whether the Petitioner can be permitted to continue vending at the identified site subject to specific regulatory and hygiene conditions pending the issuance of the CoV

The Court exercised its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

It applied the regulatory framework governing street vending (derived from the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014), which mandates the protection of vendors who have been surveyed by the TVC

The Court further relied on the principle of "proportionality and public order," balancing the vendor's right to livelihood with the public's right to unhindered pedestrian movement and traffic flow

The Court noted that the Petitioner’s participation in the survey was an undisputed fact corroborated by the URI acknowledgement

Given that the MCD’s survey process had concluded in January 2026, the Court reasoned that the Petitioner should not be left in a state of uncertainty regarding his legal status

Consequently, the Court directed the MCD to expedite the issuance of the provisional CoV upon document verification

To resolve the conflict between vending and public space management, the Court established a conditional framework: the Petitioner was allowed to continue vending provided he maintained a minimal physical footprint, ensured hygiene through dustbins, and refrained from encroaching on pedestrian paths or traffic junctions

This ensured that the Petitioner's livelihood was protected while addressing the Respondents' concerns regarding urban congestion

The Court held that the Petitioner shall not be disturbed from the vending site so long as he adheres to six specific conditions: (i) use of only small gas cylinders; (ii) maintenance of hygiene and use of dustbins; (iii) no encroachment on pedestrian areas; (iv) staying away from the Ring Road junction; (v) ensuring no vehicle parking in front of the vend; and (vi) no erection of permanent or temporary structures