[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Ram Prasad (Deceased) Through His ... vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi on 19 March, 2026
Author: Prathiba M. Singh
Bench: Prathiba M. Singh
$~52
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: 19th March, 2026.
Uploaded on: 24th March, 2026.
+ W.P.(C) 3524/2026
RAM PRASAD (DECEASED) THROUGH HIS
DAUGHTER RITA DEVI .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sanjay Baniwal, Ms. Manisha,
and Mr. R.K. Seewal Adv.
(M:8810641307)
versus
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Respondent
Through: Ms. Namrata Mukim, Standing
Counsel, MCD with Ms Niharika
Singh and Ms Sakshi Saxena, Advs.
with Mr Kiran Pal, LI, CNZ, MCD.
(M: 9899106515)
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUSTICE MADHU JAIN
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (ORAL)
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The present petition has been filed on behalf of the Petitioner- Late.
Shri. Ram Prasad, through his daughter Smt. Rita Devi under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India seeking directions to the Municipal Corporation of
Delhi (hereinafter, 'MCD') to allow Smt. Rita Devi to peacefully vend from
the vending site Opposite 427, Bus Stand, Near Nizamuddin Railway Station,
New Delhi-110013, Central Zone, Ward- S-55 (hereinafter, 'vending site').
3. The brief background of the present case is that, the Petitioner- Late
Shri. Ram Prasad was issued a Certificate of Vending (hereinafter, 'CoV')
bearing URI No. 3864468 for Central Zone, Ward-S-55 under the category
'Food/Snack without Gas Cylinder/Fire'.
4. Thereafter, Shri. Ram Prasad passed away on 29th April, 2021 and
since then, his daughter, Smt. Rita Devi has been vending from the vending
site.
5. The case of Smt. Rita Devi is that, after the demise of her father, she
has been running a mobile vend at the vending site near Nizamuddin area.
However, the concerned officials of the MCD are not allowing her to
peacefully vend from the vending site.
6. The photograph of the Petitioner's vend attached as Annexure P-3 in
the present petition, has also been placed on record and the same is extracted
below:
7. Ms. Namrata Mukim, ld. Standing Counsel for MCD submits that there
is no material on record to establish that Smt. Rita Devi is the daughter of the
CoV holder, namely Late Shri Ram Prasad, inasmuch as no identity proof has
been placed on record. She further submits that the provisional CoV appears
to have been issued on 7th November 2021, i.e., subsequent to the demise of
Shri Ram Prasad. Thus, it is submitted that the CoV is void.
8. Ld. Standing Counsel for the MCD has also placed on record certain
photographs and a video, which shows that the vend of the Petitioner along
with certain other carts are obstructing the entrance of Mata Sushila Malhotra
DAV Primary School located in Hazarat Nizamuddin East, New Delhi. Let
the video placed on record by the MCD be tagged along with the electronic
record of the Court.
9. The photographs placed on record by MCD is extracted hereinbelow:
10. A perusal of the photographs and video placed on record by the ld.
Counsel for the MCD would reveal that Petitioner's vend is not a mobile vend.
The Petitioner has put up various tables and chairs and is, in fact, running a
restaurant, which is completely contrary to the terms and conditions of the
CoV.
11. Furthermore, ld. Standing Counsel for the MCD submits that the
school authorities have also complained that these vends are selling
substances including gutka, pan masala etc., which would be completely
impermissible outside a primary school. The complaint filed by the school is
set out below:
12. The Court has considered the matter. Serious objection is taken to the
photograph filed by the Petitioner on the ground that the same is misleading.
The images placed on record by the MCD are quite stark. A perusal of the
photographs and videos placed on record by the MCD would show that the
vend of the Petitioner is opposite the Mata Sushila Malhotra DAV Primary
School.
13. The actual condition of the vend is completely different that what is
reflected in the photograph placed on record by the Petitioner which is
attached as Annexure P-3, to the present petition.
14. Clearly, the photograph which has been placed on record by the
Petitioner is untrue, incorrect and misleading. The photograph has been filed
deliberately, to obtain a relief from the Court.
15. This Court has repeatedly emphasized that filing of misleading
photographs to show the vend in a proper manner when in reality, the situation
is different, would not be condoned by this Court. The same has been
reiterated by this Court in W.P.(C) 19794/2025 titled 'Om Prakash v.
Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors. wherein the Petitioner was running
a chole kulche vend at the Meherchand Market, Lodhi road and was held liable
for misleading the Court with 'dressed-up' images of his vend. The relevant
portion of the said order is extracted hereinbelow:
"[...]
9. The photographs given by the Petitioner when
compared with the video given by Ms. Mukim, ld.
Counsel shows a completely stark difference in the
manner in which the Petitioner is operating the
vend. The Petitioner is in effect, running a small
restaurant itself on the footpath which would be
impermissible in terms of the CoV, as the Petitioner
can only be a mobile vendor.
10. Mr. Mishra, ld. Counsel for the Petitioner prays
for parity with other similarly placed vendors for
whom Condition No. 11 of the CoV has been waived.
11. In the opinion of this Court, the Petitioner
ought to have come with clean hands in order to
seek relief. The photographs filed by the Petitioner
are completely misleading and are contrary to the
video which has been produced by the ld. Counsel
for the MCD.
XXX
16. Ms. Mukim, ld. Counsel for the MCD, thereafter,
through an official of the MCD has produced the live
video of the area, which shows that the place is
completely littered with garbage. There are several
tables where the customers are eating the food. The
entire footpath is completely covered. Half the road
in front of the cart is encroached. It is clear that the
photographs filed by the Petitioner are completely
deceptive. Relevant images from the live video
shown to the Court are as under:
XXX
17. Clearly the Petitioner is in violation of various
terms and conditions of the Certificate of Vending
issued to him. The relief sought is that the
Petitioner's peaceful vending ought not to be
disturbed - which is a relief that cannot be granted
when the Petitioner is in violation of the vending
conditions. Under these circumstances, this Court
is not inclined to grant any relief to the Petitioner.
The Petitioner is also guilty of having misleading
this Court by presenting 'dressed-up' images of his
cart/vend when the reality was completely to the
contrary. The petition is dismissed with costs of Rs.
10,000/- to be paid to the Delhi High Court Legal
Services Committee..."
16. Moreover, the manner in which the restaurant is being run is completely
contrary to the vending conditions mentioned in the provisional CoV.
17. In view there of, Smt. Rita Devi is in gross contravention of terms and
conditions of the CoV as also the fact that the she is not possessing any right
under Section 5(2) of the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and
Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014, the relief sought in the present
petition cannot be granted to the Petitioner.
18. Accordingly, MCD shall take action against Smt. Rita Devi in
accordance with law, to ensure that the ingress and egress of the Mata Sushila
Malhotra DAV Primary School is not obstructed in any manner by the
Petitioner's vend as also by any other vends and carts. The other vends and
carts which are selling products such as gutka, paan masala, etc., - that too in
front of a school, shall also be removed from the vicinity of the said school,
by the MCD.
19. If Smt. Rita Devi wishes to vend in terms of the photograph, which has
been placed on record as Annexure P-3, she is permitted to approach the
Assistant Commissioner, MCD with a representation, who shall consider the
same in accordance with law and an order shall be passed after verifying the
credentials.
20. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed with costs of Rs.10,000/- to be
deposited by Smt. Rita Devi with the Delhi High Court Legal Services
Committee. The said costs shall be deposited within a period of one month
and the proof thereof shall be furnished in the Court. If the costs are not
deposited, the representations made by Smt. Rita Devi shall not be considered
by the MCD.
21. The bank details of the Delhi High Court Legal Service Committee are
as under:
● Name: Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee
● Account No: 15530110008386
● IFSC Code: UCBA0001553
● Bank and Branch: UCO Bank, Delhi High Court
22. Pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUDGE
MADHU JAIN
JUDGE
MARCH 19, 2026/dk/sm
