2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 22049
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, Dinesh Bhatt, JJ
Devender Singh Alias Dukhi Singh – Appellant
Versus
New Delhi Municipal Council – Respondent
W.P.(C) 7820/2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Satish Kumar Tripathi, Devendra Kumar
For the Respondents: Sriharsha Peechara, Jitendra Kumar Tripathi, Soumit Ganguli, Ravicha Sharma, Akash Sharma, Pranav Proothi, Mansi Chatpalliwar, Anshveer Singh Nalwa
Inclusion in a pre-existing street vendor list does not authorize the occupation of space exceeding permissible limits or the creation of traffic congestion; eligibility for a Certificate of Vending is subject to Town Vending Committee review and adherence to specific space restrictions.
Headnote:(A) Street Vending - Issuance of Certificate of Vending (CoV) - Inclusion in a list of pre-existing vendors does not grant an absolute right to occupy space beyond permissible limits or create traffic congestion. (Para 11)
(B) Administrative Procedure - Town Vending Committee (TVC) - Eligibility for CoV to be determined by the constituted TVC subject to compliance with space and cleanliness conditions. (Para 12, 13, 15)
Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to the issuance of a Certificate of Vending and the conditions governing the occupation of vending space.
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 issue a Certificate of Vending (hereinafter, ‘CoV’).
3. The Petitioner is a vendor in the Sarojini Nagar Market and claims to be vending opposite Shop No.3, Mini Market, Sarojini Nagar Market, New Delhi.
4. The case of the Petitioner is that he has been found ineligible, despite being properly surveyed by the Town Vending Committee-I.
5. On 20th July, 2026, the Court had heard the ld. Counsels for the parties and the stand taken by the New Delhi Municipal Council (hereinafter, ‘NDMC’) was that the survey in the said area has already been completed and the Petitioner has been found ineligible. The reason given by the NDMC, on the said date, is as under:
6. Further, on the said date, the Court had directed the ld. Counsel for the NDMC to place an affidavit on record, stating the reasons for rejecting the issuance of provisional CoV to the Petitioner.
7. Today, a status report has been filed on behalf of the NDMC. As per the said status report, the identity of the Petitioner itself is being doubted as the Aadhar Card and Voter ID Card are stated to be different.
8. The photographs placed on record by the Petitioner are set out below:
9. The Court has considered the matter. A perusal of the photographs placed on record by the Petitioner would show that the Petitioner is occupying much larger space than what is permitted as per the terms and conditions applicable under the provisional CoV.
10. The Petitioner is stated to be included in the list of 628 street vendors prepared by the NDMC, wherein protection was granted to all those who were considered to be pre-existing vendors prior to the enactment of the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014.
11. However, such inclusion in the said list would not, by itself, entitle the Petitioner to occupy more space than what is permissible, or create any obstruction or cause traffic congestion in the area.
12. Accordingly, the Petitioner’s case for issuance of CoV shall be considered by the TVC-II, after it is constituted.
13. Further, the Petitioner shall also abide by the following conditions:
(i) The Petitioner shall restrict himself to a space of 4x6 ft., for selling ladies handbags and shall not occupy more space.
(ii) He shall also maintain cleanliness and ensure that there is no traffic congestion created in the area.
14. Subject to the above directions, the Petitioner is permitted to sell ladies handbags, restricting himself to a space of 4x6 ft.
15. After the TVC-II is constituted, the Petitioner’s case shall be considered for issuance of certificate of vending.
16. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of in the above terms. Pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.