Facts
The Petitioner claimed to be the daughter and sole surviving legal heir of Late Shri Jagat Singh, to whom NDMC had allotted Tehbazari Site No. N-132, Gurudwara Bangla Sahib, measuring approximately 4 × 3 feet.
Source reference: p. 5, para. 10Jagat Singh died on 8 October 1999, after which the Petitioner claimed to have continued vending from the site.
Source reference: p. 5, para. 10She submitted a representation dated 23 September 2022 seeking substitution or transfer of the Tehbazari in her name.
Source reference: pp. 1–2, paras. 3–4; p. 5, para. 10The representation remained pending because matters concerning legal-heir substitution were to be considered by the competent Town Vending Committee (“TVC”) after completion of the survey process.
Source reference: p. 6, para. 10The Petitioner participated in the survey under Survey ID No. V2025200811, but was found ineligible for a provisional Certificate of Vending (“CoV”) on account of deficient documentation, which she failed to rectify despite being given an opportunity.
Source reference: pp. 4, 6–7, paras. 7–10She alleged that she was being prevented from peacefully vending at the site.
Source reference: p. 5, para. 9Issues
Whether the Petitioner was entitled to substitution or transfer of Tehbazari Site No. N-132 in her name as the legal heir of the original allottee.
Source reference: pp. 1–2, paras. 2–4; p. 5, para. 10Whether the Petitioner was entitled to issuance of a provisional Certificate of Vending despite deficiencies in her supporting documentation.
Source reference: p. 4, paras. 6–8; pp. 6–7, para. 10Whether the Petitioner should be permitted to continue vending pending consideration of her claim by the competent TVC.
Source reference: p. 5, para. 9; pp. 7–9, paras. 11–16Law Applied
The Court applied the statutory and regulatory framework governing street vending, principally the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014 and the Delhi Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Scheme, 2019.
Source reference: no citationThe Court recognised that the competent TVC was required to consider claims for substitution or transfer based on legal heirship and applications for provisional CoVs in accordance with the applicable statute, Rules and Scheme.
Source reference: p. 6, para. 10The Court also referred to the proposed Town Vending Plan under Section 21 of the 2014 Act, making its directions subject to the plan formulated by TVC-II.
Source reference: p. 9, para. 16Pending such determination, vending could be permitted subject to the standard conditions applicable to CoV holders, including compliance with the prescribed vending zone, hygiene, safety, pedestrian movement, non-transferability and prohibition against permanent or temporary construction.
Source reference: pp. 7–9, para. 13Reasoning
The Court found that the original Tehbazari site and the Petitioner’s relationship with the original allottee were supported by the available record, but held that the pending representation did not itself amount to an order transferring the site or confer an unconditional right to vend.
Source reference: p. 6, para. 10Since the survey had been completed and the Petitioner had participated in it, her claims for legal-heir substitution and a provisional CoV were directed to be considered by TVC-II after its constitution.
Source reference: p. 7, para. 12The Court identified three matters requiring compliance: the vend had to conform to the standard size of 6 × 4 feet; the deficient documentation had to be completed; and, if other legal heirs existed, their no-objection affidavits might be required.
Source reference: p. 7, para. 11Although the Petitioner had not qualified for a provisional CoV because of insufficient documentation, the Court granted interim protection to allow her to vend subject to the standard CoV conditions and without creating any vested right.
Source reference: pp. 7–9, paras. 13–16Holding
The Court did not direct immediate transfer of the Tehbazari or issuance of a provisional CoV.
It permitted the Petitioner to vend in the meantime, subject to the standard CoV conditions and the requirement that the vend not exceed 6 × 4 feet.
Source reference: pp. 7–9, paras. 13–14The Petitioner was directed to complete and submit the deficient documentation, including no-objection affidavits from other legal heirs, if any, to NDMC within one month.
Source reference: p. 9, para. 14Upon constitution of TVC-II, the Petitioner’s request for substitution of the Tehbazari and issuance of a provisional CoV was to be decided within three months.
Source reference: p. 9, para. 15These directions were made subject to the Town Vending Plan under Section 21 of the 2014 Act, and no vested rights were to be claimed.
Source reference: p. 9, para. 16The petition and pending applications were accordingly disposed of.
Source reference: p. 9, para. 17Acts & Sections Cited
1 provisions across 1 statute referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.
Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 20141
Original Court PDF
SoniavsNew Delhi Muncipal Council
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
