Vending Rights are Contingent Upon Strict Adherence to Hygiene Standards and Permissible Space Limits

The Petitioner, a street vendor holding a Certificate of Vending (CoV) No. 1162365 for "Food/Snacks with gas cylinder/fire," approached the High Court seeking directions to prevent alleged harassment by authorities and to allow peaceful vending at a designated site in Tughlakabad Extension.

The Petitioner claimed he was being obstructed from vending despite his license.

However, the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) presented counter-photographs showing that the Petitioner had encroached upon the footpath, maintained unhygienic conditions, and installed an unauthorized tandoor beyond permissible limits.

1. Whether the Petitioner is entitled to protection against respondent interference while operating in violation of the terms and conditions of his Certificate of Vending?

2. Whether the Petitioner’s conduct and the physical state of the vending site warranted judicial intervention for site restoration?

The court applied the Delhi Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Scheme, 2019, and the specific terms of the Certificate of Vending (CoV).

Key principles included: the mandatory requirement for vendors to maintain hygiene and public health (Condition 6 & 15); the prohibition against causing hindrance to pedestrians or blocking footpaths (Condition 8 & 12); the prohibition of permanent or temporary structures at the site (Condition 14); and the rule that vending certificates are subject to cancellation upon violation of these conditions (Condition 13).

The Court compared the photographs submitted by the Petitioner with those provided by the MCD and concluded that the Petitioner had misled the Court.

While the Petitioner claimed peaceful vending, the evidence demonstrated that he had significantly exceeded his allotted space, created unhygienic surroundings, and failed to adhere to the tandoor/utensil maintenance standards prescribed in the CoV.

The Court reasoned that the statutory protections afforded to street vendors are not absolute but are contingent upon strict adherence to the health, safety, and administrative conditions of the license.

Since the Petitioner was in clear breach of Conditions 6, 8, 12, and 14 of the CoV, he could not claim a right to remain undisturbed by the authorities.

The Court directed that the authorities are free to proceed against the Petitioner in accordance with law, though he may be permitted to vend if he strictly complies with CoV terms.

Additionally, the Court ordered a repair drive for the surrounding footpath and road, requiring the MCD or PWD to file compliance photographs by September 17, 2026.