1. Street vendor with locomotor disability sought directions to vend at his designated footpath spot. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 18637
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, Dinesh Bhatt, JJ
Vinay Singh – Appellant
Versus
Chairman, Town Vending Committee – Respondent
W.P.(C) 13954/2026
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Aditya, Mr. Vipin Kumar, Mr. Anjani Kumar Mishra, Ms. Anjani Kumar Mishra, Ms. Pralika Chakraborty, Mr. Fareeduddin
For the Respondents: Ms Shilpa Dewan, Dr. Geetanjali Sharma, Mr. Himanshu, Ms. Vaishali Gupta, Ms. Aanchal Rajput
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Aditya, Mr. Vipin Kumar, Mr. Anjani Kumar Mishra, Ms. Anjani Kumar Mishra, Ms. Pralika Chakraborty, Mr. Fareeduddin
For the Respondents: Ms Shilpa Dewan, Dr. Geetanjali Sharma, Mr. Himanshu, Ms. Vaishali Gupta, Ms. Aanchal Rajput
The Court directed the MCD to identify an alternative vending site for a street vendor with a locomotor disability, emphasizing an empathetic approach to protect his livelihood despite the original site being a non-vending zone.
Headnote:(A) Street Vending - Livelihood of Persons with Disabilities - Empathetic approach - Where a vending site is designated as a 'no vending' zone, the authorities may be directed to identify an alternative site in the vicinity to ensure the livelihood of a vendor with locomotor disability is not hampered. (Para 11)
Issues: Whether the Petitioner, a person with locomotor disability, can be permitted to vend at a designated 'no vending' zone or be provided an alternative site for his livelihood.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Petitioner sought permission to vend at designated spot; MCD argued it was a non-vending zone. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 )
3. MCD's stand on non-vending zone was correct, but empathetic view taken due to petitioner's disability. (Para 10 , 11 )
4. Authorities must balance enforcement with empathy, especially for persons with disability, under Article 226. (Para 11 )
5. Court directed MCD to hear the petitioner and identify alternative vending site nearby. (Para 12 , 13 )
6. Can street vendors be removed from non-vending zones despite disability?
Yes, but authorities must consider disability and provide alternative vending sites. (Para 10 , 11 )
7. What relief is available to persons with disability who are street vendors facing eviction?
Court may direct authorities to hear them and identify alternative vending locations. (Para 11 , 12 )
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking directions to the Respondents to allow the Petitioner to peacefully vend at his designated spot i.e., on the footpath, Shyamnath Marg, Near Police Booth, Kashmere Gate, City SP Zone, Ward-83-N, New Delhi (hereinafter ‘vending site’).
3. The case of the Petitioner is that he is a street vendor, who has 47% locomotor disability. In this regard, reliance is placed upon the disability certificate of the Petitioner, bearing UD ID: DL0660619870031536 dated 19th October, 2023.
4. It is submitted by ld. Counsel that the Petitioner used to vend certain food items from the said vending site.
5. The further case of the Petitioner is that a survey of the area was carried out by the Town Vending Committee in 2021, however, he was left out from the said survey. Thereafter, the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (hereinafter ‘MCD’) had opened a portal for those vendors who had been left out, under which the Petitioner has also stated to have registered himself.
6. The registration of the Petitioner on the MCD portal is set out below:
7. The submission of ld. Counsel for the Petitioner is that the Petitioner continued to vend from the vending site, however, on 4th August, 2026, he was removed from his place of vending on the ground of the forthcoming Independence Day events.
8. Further, the Petitioner is also stated to have made a representation dated 17th September, 2026 to the MCD, regarding the continuous harassment faced by him at the hands of the officials of the MCD and Delhi Police. However, the same has not been decided.
9. Ld. Counsel for the MCD submits that the place from where the Petitioner was vending is a ‘No squatting’ and ‘No vending’ zone, and he cannot be permitted to vend from the said area.
10. Heard. A perusal of the photographs placed on record by the Petitioner shows that he is the only vendor on the said road. The said photographs are extracted below:
11. The stand of the MCD that the said road is a Non-vending zone appears to be correct. However, taking an empathetic view of the fact that the Petitioner has a locomotor disability, and to ensure that his livelihood is not hampered, the following directions are issued -
(i) The Petitioner shall appear before the concerned Assistant Commissioner, MCD on 06th October, 2026 at 11.30 a.m.;
ii) After hearing the Petitioner, the concerned Assistant Commissioner, MCD shall decide the representation dated 17th September, 2026 made by the Petitioner.
iii) The Assistant Commissioner shall also identify any other site in the vicinity of the said area, from where the Petitioner can vend, within one week thereafter. The Petitioner shall then be permitted to vend from the said site. The Petitioner shall abide by the terms and conditions which are usually applicable to Provisional CoV holders;
iv) The Town Vending Committee-II, shall, after being constituted, take a decision pertaining to the registration of the Petitioner on the MCD portal, within a period of three months.
12. All rights and remedies of the Petitioner are left open.
13. Petition is disposed of in these terms. All pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.
