Tehbazari Licensees Cannot Erect Permanent Structures or Claim Absolute Rights to Specific Vending Sites

In brief

The question

1. Whether a tehbazari licensee has a legal right to claim physical possession of a specific vending site despite previous violations of allotment conditions and local spatial constraints

The court held

The Court held that the Petitioner cannot demand the specific site at Kucha Natwa as a right

It also directed

The Court directed the newly constituted TVC to identify an alternative vending site for the Petitioner within three months of its formation. The Petitioner was strictly ordered to comply with all tehbazari terms at the new site and refrain from any further violations. The petition and pending applications were disposed of accordingly

01Facts

The Petitioner, an old squatter at Dangal Maidan, was displaced due to a redevelopment project

pp. 1-2

On December 6, 2019, the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) reallotted him a tehbazari (vending) site at Kucha Natwa, Chandni Chowk, and issued a possession slip on January 3, 2020

p. 2

However, the Petitioner constructed a permanent lockable structure with shutters at the site, leading the MCD to cancel the allotment

p. 2

A previous challenge to this cancellation (W.P.(C) 1403/2022) was dismissed, with the Court holding that such structures violated vending conditions

pp. 2-3

Simultaneously, a Resident Welfare Association (RWA) challenged the allotment of vendors at Kucha Natwa due to space constraints (W.P.(C) 1847/2020)

p. 5

The Petitioner filed the present writ seeking physical possession of the Kucha Natwa site

p. 6

02Issues

i.1. Whether a tehbazari licensee has a legal right to claim physical possession of a specific vending site despite previous violations of allotment conditions and local spatial constraints

p. 7 · ¶ 21

ii.2. Whether the Court can direct the identification and allocation of an alternative vending site through the statutory Town Vending Committee (TVC)

p. 7 · ¶ 23

03Law Applied

The Court applied the principles governing tehbazari and street vending licenses, emphasizing that such licenses do not grant a right to permanent occupation or the erection of permanent/temporary structures on public streets

pp. 3-4 · ¶ 10

It relied on the interpretation that a license is merely a permission to vend during specific times and areas, and does not constitute an allotment of land

p. 4 · ¶ 16

The Court operated under the framework of the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014, specifically regarding the role of the Town Vending Committee (TVC) in identifying and allocating vending zones

p. 7 · ¶ 22-23

Provisions in the judgment · 8 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 22

Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 Section 42 Section 312 Section 321 Section 326

04Reasoning

The Court reasoned that the Petitioner could not claim the Kucha Natwa site as a matter of right because he had previously abused the license by erecting a permanent structure—effectively attempting to convert a public pavement into a private shop—which was a "clear violation" of vending conditions

pp. 2-3 · ¶ 10-11

The Court observed that the Kucha Natwa site was functionally unsuitable due to its narrowness and lack of Fire Department NOCs

p. 6 · ¶ 20

Since the Town Vending Committee (TVC), the statutory body responsible for such decisions, was in the process of being constituted through elections in July 2026, the Court determined that the TVC is the appropriate authority to decide on relocation rather than the Court mandating a specific site

p. 7 · ¶ 22-23