Allowed

Md. Mobin v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Others

Delhi HC6 Mar 2024W.P.(C)/3399/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition by a street vendor seeking protection from removal while vending. The court directed respondents not to interfere with the petitioner's activities provided he complies with his Certification of Vending (COV) terms and other applicable laws, despite the absence of a fixed allotted site.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents not to interdict petitioner's vending activities provided he complies with COV terms and other applicable laws.

Md. Mobin Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Others — Service and Employment | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~35

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 3399/2024 CM APPL. 13906/2024

¶4

MD. MOBIN ..... Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Abhishek Saxena, Mr. Singh Nishant Sanjay Kumar, Mr. Vaibhav Patel, Mr. Saurav Dewal, Mr. Rahul Pratap Singh, Mr. Munish, Ms. Mumtaz Shaikh and Ms. Kamini, Advs.

¶6

versus

¶7

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI AND OTHERS

¶8

..... Respondents Through: Mr. Nikhil Palli and Mr. Arinjay Singh, Advs. for R-1.

¶9

Mohd. Irsad, ASC with Ms. Nasreen, Mr. Kunal and Mr. Shailash Chouhan, Advs. for R-2 and 3.

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU

¶12

CM Appl.13907/2024

¶13

Exemption is allowed, subject to just exceptions.

¶14

The application is accordingly disposed of.

¶15

W.P.(C) 3399/2024 CM APPL. 13906/2024

¶16

The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, praying as under:-

¶17

“A. Pass an Order directing the respondents to ensure that that the petitioner is allowed to peacefully vend in terms of his vending site i.e. Shahdara south zone 15-E, New Delhi, without any Let or hindrance being cause by any public official;

¶18

B. Pass an order directing the respondents, their officials, their agents etc. be restrained from harassing-dislocating-

¶19

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/03/2024 at 11:37:27

¶20

removing the petitioners from peacefully vending at his vending site;

¶21

C. Pass an order directing the SHO P.S. SHAKARPUR to ensure that the petitioner street vendor shall not be forcefully and illegally be removed from his vending site; D. Pass an order directing the respondent Government of NCT of Delhi to comply and effectuate the provision of section 20 of the STREET VENDORS (PROTECTION OF LIVELIHOOD AND REGULATIONS OF STREET VENDING) ACT, 2014, and make the dispute redressal committee functional within the stipulated time period; and E. Pass an such order that no street vendor shall be evicted from his vending site till the formation of the vending zone.”

¶22

The petitioner has been issued a Certification of Vending ( COV ) which indicates the vending area as Shahdara south zone 15-E, New Delhi. Admittedly, the petitioner does not have a Tehbazari license for vending from a fixed site. Thus, in accordance with the terms and conditions of the COV, the petitioner is proscribed from vending at a particular place for more than 30 minutes or any such time as may be determined by the Town Vending Committee ( TVC ).

¶23

The petitioner has also sought a direction that he be not removed from his vending site.

¶24

We are not persuaded to accept the same.

¶25

Admittedly, no specific site was allotted to the petitioner. The TVC is required to conduct a survey and NDMC is required to prepare a vending plan in terms of Section 21 of the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act 2014 in consultation with the TVC. Thus, till a decision is taken by the TVC, the petitioner is required to be considered as “Mobile Vendor” .

¶26

The learned counsel appearing for the respondents submit that they

¶27

¶28

would have no objection if the petitioner carries on the vending activities, subject to the same being strictly in accordance with the COV and in compliance with other applicable laws.

¶29

In view of the above, we dispose of the present petition by directing the respondents not to interdict or interfere with the petitioner’s vending activities, subject to the petitioner complying with the terms and conditions of the COV as well as other applicable laws.

¶30

The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Pending application also stands disposed of.

¶31

VIBHU BAKHRU, J

¶32

TARA VITASTA GANJU, J MARCH 06, 2024/r Click here to check corrigendum, if any

¶33

Md. Mobin v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Mobin v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vijendra Kumar Vs Union of India & Ors.

Ojaswi Bundela Vs Union of India & Ors.

Deepak Marwah, Vs New Delhi Municipal Council & Anr.

Mohan Lal Gaba Vs Central Board of Direct Taxes Income Tax Department

Gaurav Chellani Vs Central Board of Secondary Education(Cbse) & Ors.

Tafsir Ali Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

Brajinder Singh Batra Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors.

Subnam Gupta Sabnam Gupta Vs Union of India

Mahesh Kumar Prajapati Vs Municipal Corporation Delhi

Balvir Arora and Ors. Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

Mulchand and Anr. Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

Pooja Sharma Vs the Registrar General High Court of Delhi and Ors.

Pankaj Dhiman Vs the Registrar General High Court of Delhi and Ors.

Mohd. Shadab Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Others