1. Petition by a provisional certificate of vending holder aggrieved by repeated disturbance from MCD and Delhi Police. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 20021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, Vikas Mahajan, JJ
Vijay Das – Appellant
Versus
Municipal Corporation of Delhi – Respondent
W.P.(C) 13401/2026
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Aditya, Anjani Kumar Mishra, Vipin Kumar, Pralika Chakraborty, Fareeduddin
For the Respondents: Meherunnisa A. Jaitley, Aryan Tyagi, Jaskeerat Singh, Aanchal Rajput, Raghvendra Shukla, Sarvesh P Shrivastava, Manu Shukla
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Aditya, Anjani Kumar Mishra, Vipin Kumar, Pralika Chakraborty, Fareeduddin
For the Respondents: Meherunnisa A. Jaitley, Aryan Tyagi, Jaskeerat Singh, Aanchal Rajput, Raghvendra Shukla, Sarvesh P Shrivastava, Manu Shukla
The court held that while street vendors with provisional certificates have a right to vend, this right is subject to the authority's power to relocate them to prevent traffic congestion and ensure public hygiene and order.
Headnote:(A) Street Vending - Provisional Certificate of Vending (CoV) - Right to vend vs. Traffic Congestion - While a vendor with a provisional CoV is entitled to relief, the authority can relocate the vendor to a suitable area to prevent obstruction of vehicular and pedestrian traffic. (Para 14)
(B) Vending Conditions - Hygiene and Space - Vendors operating under the 'Food/Snack with gas cylinder/fire' category must adhere to strict hygiene standards, use small gas cylinders, and avoid creating permanent structures or third-party interests. (Para 15)
Issues: Whether the petitioner can be permitted to vend at the specific site despite extreme traffic congestion and the conditions of the provisional CoV.
Result: Petition disposed of with directions for relocation and compliance with vending conditions.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Petitioner sought relaxation of condition No.11 of CoV; MCD cited traffic congestion and proposed vendor relocation. (Para 7 , 8 , 10 , 11 )
3. Court observed extreme congestion in service lane near metro station and that petitioner occupied larger area than permitted. (Para 13 )
4. Street vendors with provisional CoV must not obstruct traffic; authorities may relocate them to suitable alternate spaces. (Para 14 )
5. MCD to identify alternate vending site; petition disposed with directions on relocation and compliance with CoV conditions. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 )
6. Can a street vendor be directed to shift from their designated vending site due to traffic congestion?
Yes, the court permitted MCD to identify alternate space to prevent congestion, subject to compliance with CoV conditions. (Para 14 , 15 )
7. What conditions must a provisional certificate of vending holder comply with?
Conditions include no obstruction to traffic, maintaining hygiene, not constructing permanent structures, and not sub-letting the certificate. (Para 15 )
8. Is condition No.11 of the provisional certificate of vending (limiting vending time) applicable in this case?
No, the court directed that condition No.11 shall not apply to the petitioner, subject to compliance with other conditions. (Para 15 )
9. What is the role of the Town Vending Committee (TVC) in regulating street vendors?
TVC determines vending periods and zones; the court's directions are subject to any future plan by the TVC under the 2014 Act. (Para 18 )
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner, inter alia, seeking directions to the Respondents to allow the Petitioner to peacefully vend from the vending site i.e., On the Footpath/Open Space, Opp. A12, Near Adarsh Nagar Metro Station, Adarsh Nagar, Civil Lines Zone, Ward-17-N, New Delhi (hereinafter “the vending site”).
3. The Petitioner is a street vendor who has been vending from vending site for several years.
4. The Petitioner holds a provisional Certificate of Vending (hereinafter, ‘CoV’) bearing URI No. 7194907 under the category of “Food/Snack with gas cylinder/fire” for Civil Lines, Ward 17-N.
5. The photograph of the vending cart of the Petitioner is set out below:
6. The Petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that, despite having a provisional CoV, he is being repeatedly disturbed by the officials of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (hereinafter, ‘MCD’) and the Delhi Police, and not being allowed to conduct his vending activities peacefully.
7. The submission of ld. Counsel for the Petitioner is that he may be permitted to vend without the imposition of condition No.11 in the provisional CoV.
8. Ld. Counsel for the MCD has placed on record various photographs of the road in question, from where the Petitioner is vending, as well as the service lane situated right next to the Adarsh Nagar Metro Station.
9. The said photographs are taken on record and are set out below:
10. It is the submission of ld. Counsel for MCD that the area is extremely congested, and that the traffic around the Adarsh Nagar Metro Station, including the ingress and egress thereto, is being detrimentally affected.
11. It is also submitted that the MCD is taking a decision to relocate the vendors to a by-lane so that the said service lane can remain free from congestion and be kept open for the smooth movement of traffic and pedestrians.
12. Heard the ld. Counsel for the parties. The Court has perused the photographs placed on record by the ld. Counsel for the MCD.
13. A perusal of the photographs would reveal the following:
(i) That there is extreme congestion in the service lane.
(ii) That the area also requires to be maintained in a clean and orderly manner, particularly as it runs parallel to the Ring Road and is next to the Metro station.
(iii) That the Petitioner is occupying a much larger area, by placing side tables, stands, service counters, etc., all of which would not be permissible in terms of the provisional CoV.
14. Considering the congestion in the area, though the Petitioner is entitled to the relief, as has been granted in similar petitions concerning vendors with provisional CoVs under the category of ‘Food/Snack with gas cylinder/fire’, in the facts and circumstances of this case, the following directions are issued:
(i) The Assistant Commissioner, MCD is permitted to identify a suitable area for vending in a space which would not cause any obstruction or congestion to vehicular or pedestrian traffic and where only authorised provisional CoV holders shall be permitted to vend.
(ii) Upon identification of such an area within two weeks, the Petitioner shall shift his vending activity to the said area.
15. In addition, upon shifting to the alternate area of vending, the Petitioner shall abide by the directions that this Court has passed in similar matters, recently, wherein vendors are vending under the category of ‘Food/Snack with gas cylinder/fire’ i.e., in W.P.(C) 15082/2025 titled ‘ Rajendra Singh v. Commissioner of Police and Ors. ’ vide order dated 2nd February, 2026, W.P.(C) 19391/2025 titled ‘Mohd Badruddin v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.’ vide order dated 8th January, 2026 and in W.P. (C) 1609/2026 titled ‘Rihana v. MCD & Ors.’ vide order dated 05th February, 2026. The said directions are:
(a) The Petitioner shall abide by the terms and conditions of the provisional CoV, which are as under:
“1. Vendor shal
