1. The petitioner sought inclusion in a survey for vending rights after transfer of a vending license. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 22094
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, Dinesh Bhatt, JJ
Kuldeep Kumar – Appellant
Versus
New Delhi Municipal Council – Respondent
W.P.(C) 14442/2026 | CM APPL. 67734/2026 | CM APPL. 67735/2026
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Kirti Uppal, Kiran Kalra Uppal, Shaini Bhardwaj, Vedic Thukral, Avichal Mishra, Rukhsar Khan, Pratham Diwakar, Kuldeep Kumar
For the Respondents: Sriharsha Peechara, Aditya Bharat Manubarwala, Soumit Ganguli, Ravicha Sharma, Akash Sharma, Tanishka Grover, Charvi Virmani, Shaila Arora, Vaishali Gupta, Aanchal Rajput
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Kirti Uppal, Kiran Kalra Uppal, Shaini Bhardwaj, Vedic Thukral, Avichal Mishra, Rukhsar Khan, Pratham Diwakar, Kuldeep Kumar
For the Respondents: Sriharsha Peechara, Aditya Bharat Manubarwala, Soumit Ganguli, Ravicha Sharma, Akash Sharma, Tanishka Grover, Charvi Virmani, Shaila Arora, Vaishali Gupta, Aanchal Rajput
The Court held that a vendor may be included in a municipal survey upon verification of genuine documents even if they missed the initial survey, provided they adhere strictly to the allotted vending space and applicable trade change rules.
Headnote:(A) Vending Rights - Survey Inclusion - Failure to participate in a survey conducted by the municipal authority does not permanently bar a vendor from inclusion if a representation is made and supporting documents are found to be genuine. (Para 17, 18)
(B) Change of Trade - Non-licence trade - In terms of administrative circulars, a change from one non-licence trade to another (not in the negative list) does not require specific permission, and a mere intimation to the authority is sufficient. (Para 10)
(C) Vending Space - Compliance - Permission to carry out vending activities is subject to strict adherence to the allotted dimensions of the site. (Para 20)
Issues: Whether the Petitioner is entitled to be included in the NDMC survey and permitted to carry out vending activities at the subject site.
Legal Category Hierarchy
- administrative and constitutional law
- practice and procedure
Table of Contents
2. The petitioner argued for inclusion and vending rights based on a circular; NDMC argued the survey was completed. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 )
3. The court observed photographs suggested a larger vend and noted the petitioner's failure to participate in the survey. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 )
4. A licensing authority must consider pending representation before excluding a person from a survey list. (Para 17 , 18 )
5. Directed consideration of the petitioner's representation and permitted vending within the licensed size. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 )
6. What is the effect of a completed survey on a pending representation for inclusion?
The authority must still consider the representation if it was given before the final decision on the survey list. (Para 17 , 18 )
7. When can a person vend beyond the allotted licensed space?
A person cannot vend beyond the allotted licensed space; the court directed vending strictly within the 3x3 ft size. (Para 15 , 20 )
8. What is the consequence of failing to participate in a survey?
Failure to participate can lead to exclusion, but the authority must still consider a pending, genuine representation. (Para 16 , 17 , 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 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking directions to the New Delhi Municipal Council (hereinafter, ‘NDMC’) and the Town Vending Committee (hereinafter, ‘TVC’) to include Petitioner’s name in the survey carried out by the NDMC as also to verify Petitioner’s claim in respect of Mochi thara being MT-15, near Mohan Singh Place, Connaught Place, New Delhi, measuring 3x3 ft (hereinafter, ‘subject site’).
3. The brief background is that the Petitioner’s father –Shri. Ghanshyam Dass was permitted to render services as a shoe-shiner from the subject site, by the NDMC in 1981.
4. Thereafter, the Petitioner’s father expired on 16th December, 2000 and, subsequently, Petitioner’s mother, Smt. Vimla Devi, is stated to have continued as a vendor of ready-made garments from the subject site.
5. Further, the Petitioner’s mother applied to NDMC for transfer of the subject site in her name, as also for change of trade to ready-made garments. The same was transferred in her name, being the legal heir of late Shri.Ghanshyam Dass, on 9th January, 2014.
6. Pursuant thereto, Petitioner’s mother permitted the Petitioner to carry out the work from the subject site. She also expired on 6th October, 2020, and thereafter, the Petitioner applied for transfer/mutation of the subject site in his name. However, the same is stated to be pending.
7. It is the case of the Petitioner that the other two other legal heirs have given No-objection in favour of the Petitioner.
8. The further case of the Petitioner is that on 17th September, 2026, the officials of the NDMC visited the subject site, and restrained the Petitioner from carrying on the vending activities.
9. Hence, the present petition, praying that the Petitioner may be included in the survey being carried out by the NDMC as also that he be given recognition so that the transfer of licence of the subject site can be made in favour of the Petitioner.
10. Mr. Kirti Uppal, ld. Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that in terms of the circular dated 16th August, 2016, bearing No. D-1043/SO(Estate-I)/2016, when there is change from non-license trade to non- licence trade activities, the same does not require any specific permission. In this regard, reliance is placed upon Clause 4 (iii) of the said circular. The said Clause is extracted below:
“Clause 4. Change of Trade xxxx xxxx xxxx (iii) For (a) change from ‘licence trade’ to ‘non-licence trade which is not in the negative list’, or (b) change from ‘non-licence trade’ to ‘non-licence trade which is not in the negative list’, or (c) grouping of non-licence trades which are not in the negative list, permission from NDMC will not be required, and an intimation, without any fee/increase in licence fee, to the Director Estate, NDMC shall be sufficient for the same.”
11. According to the Petitioner, the intimation of change of shoe-shine activities to ready-made garments has been made to the NDMC.
12. It is also the case of the Petitioner that he had submitted a detailed representation dated 18th September, 2026 to NDMC, for his inclusion in the ongoing survey of the old tehbazari holders.
13. Mr. Ganguli, ld. Counsel for the NDMC submits that the survey in the area near the subject site was conducted from 27th July, 2026 to 10th September, 2026, and the said survey has already been completed. However, the Petitioner does not appear to have participated in the said survey.
14. Heard. The photographs which have been placed on record by the Petitioner are extracted below:-
15. A perusal of the photographs placed on record by the Petitioner would reveal the following:
(i) That the Petitioner is running a ready-made garments vend;
(ii) That the size of the vend appears to be much larger than the licensed space allotted to the Petitioner, i.e., 3 × 3;
16. There are several challans whic
