[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Khursida Praveen vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi And Ors on 11 February, 2026
Author: Prathiba M. Singh
Bench: Prathiba M. Singh
$~10
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 11th February, 2026
Uploaded on: 16th February, 2026
+ W.P.(C) 17496/2025
KHURSIDA PRAVEEN .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Aditya, Mr. Kailash Kumar Jha, Mr.
Anjani Kumar Mishra, Mr. Vipin
Kumar, Mr. Fareeduddin and Ms. Srejal
Mishra, Advs.
versus
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI AND ORS
.....Respondents
Through: Ms. Puja S. Kalra, Standing Counsel for
MCD
Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Senior Panel
Counsel with Mr. Sumit, GP for R2 and
R4
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUSTICE SHAIL JAIN
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner- Khursida Praveen
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking issuance of an
appropriate writ directing the Respondents to allow the Petitioner to peacefully
vend at her designated spot i.e., on the footpath, Astha Kunj Road, near Nehru
Place Metro Station Gate No.1, Nehru Place, South Zone, Ward-S-86, New
Delhi.
3. The Petitioner has a provisional Certificate of Vending (hereinafter,
'COV') bearing URI No. 1441161 in the category of 'Food Snacks without gas
cylinder/fire'. A photograph has been placed on record by the Petitioner which
is set out below:
4. It is submitted by Mr. Aditya, ld. Counsel for the Petitioner that the
Petitioner be permitted to vend without being disturbed and harassed by the
Respondents.
5. On behalf of Municipal Corporation of Delhi (hereinafter, 'MCD'), Ms.
Kalra, ld. Counsel submits that the photograph placed on record by the Petitioner
is misleading and in fact, the Petitioner has allowed another person to vend with
her and that too in a No-vending zone, in front of the Nehru Place Metro Station.
The photographs handed over by Ms. Kalra, ld. Counsel are set out below:
6. After having perused the photographs handed over by the ld. Counsel for
the MCD, it is clear that proper photographs have not been placed before this
Court by the Petitioner. Be that as it may, the Petitioner shall move away from
this No-vending zone. However, considering that the Petitioner is disabled, she
is permitted to vend subject to following terms and conditions:
a) The Petitioner shall not be permitted to use any gas cylinder.
b) The Petitioner shall restrict herself to a particular space, where she is
operating from, and shall not extend/encroach to the pedestrian areas or
cause obstruction in movement of pedestrians;
c) The Petitioner shall also be obliged to maintain cleanliness and hygiene
around the vend, which she is working from;
d) Subject to the above, Condition No.11 in the COV shall not apply to the
Petitioner. The Petitioner shall comply with all the other conditions in the
COV.
e) It shall be ensured that the Petitioner shall not create any third party
interest in this provisional COV and there shall be a bar on sub-letting or
any handing over possession to any third party.
f) No permanent or temporary construction shall also be erected by the
Petitioner.
7. The above stated directions shall be subject to any plan which the Town
Vending Committee-II may be coming up with in terms of Section 21 of the
Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act,
2014 and no vested rights shall be claimed.
8. In addition, it is directed that MCD is free to take action against the other
vendor who can be seen in the photographs above, in accordance with law, if no
rights exist in his favour.
9. The present petition is disposed of in the said terms. Pending applications,
if any, are also disposed of.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUDGE
SHAIL JAIN
JUDGE
FEBRUARY 11, 2026/ys/ck
