Violation of vending certificate conditions and unauthorized permanent structures justify denial of protection against eviction.

The Petitioner, a street vendor holding a Certificate of Vending (COV) for a site in Fish Mandi, Ghazipur, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking to restrain the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) from disturbing his vending activities.

The Petitioner claimed he maintained hygiene and operated lawfully.

The MCD countered that the Petitioner had erected a permanent structure, covered a public drain (naala), and caused significant encroachment and unhygienic conditions.

Following a live video call from the site conducted during the hearing, the Court confirmed that the Petitioner’s site involved permanent structures and debris-filled drains, contrary to the Petitioner's claims.

Whether the Petitioner was in violation of the terms and conditions of the Certificate of Vending (COV) issued by the MCD.

Whether the Petitioner is entitled to protection against MCD's enforcement actions regarding his vending site.

The Court applied the statutory conditions attached to the Certificate of Vending (COV) issued under the Delhi Street Vendors (Livelihood Protection and Regulation of Street Vending) Scheme, 2019.

Key conditions include the prohibition against erecting permanent or temporary structures (Condition 14), the mandate to maintain cleanliness and public health (Condition 6 & 15), the requirement to ensure no obstruction to pedestrians or traffic (Condition 8 & 12), and the obligation to comply with local laws and sanitary standards (Condition 9 & 16).

The Court compared the Petitioner's photographic evidence against the MCD’s photographs and a real-time live video inspection.

It observed that the Petitioner had misrepresented the state of the vending site, having constructed a permanent structure over a drain and allowed the accumulation of garbage and debris.

The Court found that these actions constituted direct violations of multiple COV conditions, specifically those prohibiting permanent structures and requiring the maintenance of hygiene and unobstructed passage.

Consequently, the Court determined that the Petitioner’s conduct disentitled him to any equitable relief under Article 226, as the site was maintained in a manner hazardous to public health and urban infrastructure.

The MCD was granted liberty to take legal action against the Petitioner and was directed to restore hygiene by cleaning the drain to prevent waterlogging.

The Petitioner was ordered to pay costs of Rs. 10,000/- to the Delhi High Court Legal Service Committee within two weeks.

The matter was listed for a compliance report on March 23, 2026.