Removal of Encroachments and Regulation of Mobile Vending at ISBT Anand Vihar: Delhi High Court - 2026-01-22

Clearing the Path: Delhi High Court Orders Restoration of Public Space at ISBT Anand Vihar

In a decisive move to address severe urban congestion and ensure safe public access to transport hubs, the Delhi High Court has directed the complete removal of unauthorized permanent structures and encroachments at the ISBT Anand Vihar Bus Stand. The order, delivered by a bench comprising Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Madhu Jain, marks a significant shift in the legal balancing act between hawkers' livelihoods and the public's right to clear, accessible municipal space.

The Backdrop: A Decade of Legal Labyrinth

The dispute began in 2016, with the Mahila Hawker Welfare Association asserting their rights under the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014 . While the court had initially provided interim protections to prevent arbitrary eviction, it consistently qualified these protections, noting they did not apply to foot-over bridges or areas that impeded public safety. Over years of litigation, the simple claim for vending rights had morphed into a complex scenario involving permanent shop construction on sidewalks and high-traffic roads, directly challenging the "mobile vending" intent of the 2014 Act.

Arguments in the Courtroom

The Petitioner, represented by the Mahila Hawker Welfare Association, argued that its members possessed provisional Certificates of Vending (COV) and had been operating in the area for years. Conversely, the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) presented evidence—including photographs—demonstrating that the area had been overrun by permanent multi-utility kiosks, cafes, and shop-like structures that severely constricted pedestrian movement and hindered transport access for millions of commuters and DMRC/Railway users.

Key Observations: The Court’s Rationale

The bench emphasized that the right to vend does not equate to the right to permanently encroach upon public infrastructure. Highlighting the transformation from mobile hawking to static, permanent outlets, the Court noted:

• "The pictures extracted above clearly show that most of the hawkers have created permanent vends and they are no longer merely hawkers, since they have put up their outlet-like small shops, covering large areas including, pedestrian pathways."
• "The COVs which are provisional in nature clearly incorporate a condition that hawkers cannot have permanent structures. The said provisional COVs also consist of a category ‘others’ and one of the conditions therein is that the vendors have to be mobile vendors."
• "The manner in which hawking is presently being done is completely impermissible as it also encroaches upon the area created for easy movement of the public."
• "The MCD shall, accordingly, take steps, along with the SHO or the DCP of the concerned area, to remove all the vendors. However, adequate time shall be given of at least five to six days for the vendors to remove their wares."

A Path to Beautification and Order

The Court’s decision is twofold. First, it effectively clears the chaos by ordering the removal of all unauthorized structures by the end of January 2026. Second, it mandates a restorative plan: the MCD must collaborate with professional architects from the PWD to redesign the Anand Vihar area. This plan is to prioritize user-friendly transit infrastructure, including proper pick-up/drop-off points, sanitation, and organized, regulated vending zones that strictly adhere to the "mobile" mandate.

Moving forward, only 105 individuals—the specific group identified during the Town Vending Committee (TVC) survey—will be authorized to vend in the area, and even they must comply with the strictures against permanent construction. By March 10, 2026, the MCD is required to present its beautification and architectural blueprint to the Court, effectively turning a site of legal friction into a model of urban renewal.

This ruling serves as a stark reminder that while the law protects the livelihoods of street vendors, it does not provide an exemption from the duty to maintain public order and essential transit infrastructure.