Dismissed¶44

Mr. Ajay Khanna v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Anr.

Delhi HC13 Nov 2025W.P.(C)/16070/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Tehbazari; street vending; hawking; MCD allotment letter 05.09.2001; Karol Bagh; Ajmal Khan Road; Gaffar Market; no-hawking/no-vending zone; Karol Bagh Metro Station; shifting circular 06.06.2021; shifting circular 18.11.2021; Wall of Ajmal Khan Park; Chopra Committee; Ramesh Kumar v. MCD (I.A 332-333 in W.P.(C) 1899/1987); Sudhir Madan v. MCD (I.A 394 in W.P.(C) 1699/1987); Sanjeev Kapur v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation (W.P.(C) 9804/2021); Hawkers Welfare Committee v. MCD (W.P.(C) 6887/2023); writ petition dismissed; W.P.(C) 16070/2023; Delhi High Court; Nitin Wasudeo Sambre J; Anish Dayal J.

What did the court decide?

The 2001 allotment letter granting tehbazari rights was never acted upon. ¶37

Mr. Ajay Khanna Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Anr. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶44

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to carry on tehbazari/trade at the original site on Ajmal Khan Road, Karol Bagh (opposite Bhasin Crockery) pursuant to the MCD allotment letter dated 05.09.2001, and to be given possession of the allotted site, notwithstanding the subsequent shifting circulars dated 06.06.2021 and 18.11.2021 and the no-hawking/no-vending directions in the Division Bench orders in Sanjeev Kapur and Hawkers Welfare Committee.

¶18

Court's answer

The 2001 allotment letter granting tehbazari rights was never acted upon.

¶37

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner's vending rights are kept intact, and there are sufficient justifiable reasons, in public interest, for shifting the site initially offered under the circular dated 05.09.2001 to the site near the Wall of Ajmal Khan Park at Ajmal Khan Road offered vide circular dated 18.11.2021.

¶39

Key takeaways

No case is made out for interference by issuing directions to permit vending in accordance with the order dated 05.09.2001, since permitting such activity would be contrary to the two subsequent orders of this Court (Sanjeev Kapur and Hawkers Welfare Committee).ratio¶43
It shall remain open to the petitioner to approach respondent/MCD seeking the benefit of the circular dated 18.11.2021; counsel for MCD stated on instructions that the option is open even today and the site will be marked for tehbazari activity.ratio¶45

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Division Bench: Nitin Wasudeo Sambre and Anish Dayal, JJ.) dismissed a writ petition by a tehbazari licensee seeking leave to carry on trade at his original squatting site in Gaffar Market/Ajmal Khan Road, Karol Bagh, till possession of the site allotted vide MCD allotment letter dated 05.09.2001 (6x4, opposite Bhasin Crockery), and seeking possession of that allotted site. The Court found the 2001 allotment was never acted upon; owing to change in circumstances (the site being put to public use), the petitioner was shifted by circular dated 06.06.2021 to Gali No.25, Beadonpura, behind Police Station Karol Bagh, and thereafter — the Beadonpura site having to be vacated in compliance with the Division Bench order dated 16.09.2021 in Sanjeev Kapur declaring no-hawking/no-vending zones at Ajmal Khan Road, particularly around Karol Bagh Metro Station — allotted the site at the Wall of Ajmal Khan Park at Ajmal Khan Road vide circular dated 18.11.2021 (petitioner at Serial No.27 of the shifting order). Permitting vending per the 2001 letter would run contrary to the Division Bench orders in Sanjeev Kapur (W.P.(C) 9804/2021) and Hawkers Welfare Committee (W.P.(C) 6887/2023, where an identical request by a similarly placed person was rejected). The Court held the petitioner's vending rights intact and left him free to approach MCD for the benefit of the 18.11.2021 circular, which MCD confirmed on instructions remains open. Pending applications were rendered infructuous and the date fixed for 30.01.2026 was cancelled.

¶1

$~42

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 16070/2023 & & CM APPL 64669/2023 (stay)

¶4

MR. AJAY KHANNA .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Madan Mohan Kashyap & Ms. Poonam Seth, Advs.

¶6

versus

¶7

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ANR.

¶8

.....Respondents Through: Ms. Tajinder Virdi, Standing Counsel for R-MCD (thru VC)

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NITIN WASUDEO SAMBRE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL

¶11

O R D E R % 13.11.2025

¶12

CM APPL. 70909/2025 ( for early hearing )

¶13

Heard.

¶14

The petition is being heard.

¶15

Application stands disposed of.

¶16

W.P.(C) 16070/2023

¶17

This petition has been filed seeking following prayers:

¶18

“a. To allow the petitioner to carry on trade at her present squatting site CORNER GALI N0.1,GAFFAR MARKET, KAROL BAGH, NEW DELHI- 110015 till the possession of allotted site at 10/15 Opposite Bhasin Crockery, Ajmal Khan Road, Karol Bagh Delhi given to the petitioner.

¶19

b. To the petitioner should be given possession of his

¶20

This is a digitally signed order.

¶21

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 15/11/2025 at 12:48:44

¶22

allotted site at 10/15 wall of Police Station Karol Bagh Delhi with immigrate effect.”

¶23

Counsel for petitioner, in order to justify the prayer in the petition, as extracted above, has sought to rely upon an allotment letter dated 05^th September 2001, issued by respondent/ Municipal Corporation of Delhi (‘ MCD’ ), wherein an area admeasuring 6x4 was earmarked on “ Ajmal Khan Road , opposite Bhasin Crockery ” , to be the tehbazari site for petitioner.

¶24

According to counsel for petitioner, the amount mentioned in the said allotment letter was duly paid; however, till date, petitioner has not been permitted to continue his tehbazari activity on said site. 4. Counsel for petitioner invited our attention to an order dated 05^th May 2000, delivered by the Supreme Court in I.A No.332-333 in W.P. (C) 1899/1987 titled as “ Ramesh Kumar v. MCD & Ors .”, so as to claim that the petitioner was allotted the site in question, pursuant to the report of the Chopra Committee, and that there are directions that those who have been allotted sites in compliance with the Chopra Committee cannot be reviewed.

¶25

In addition to above, he has invited our attention to order passed by the Supreme Court on 05^th May 2006, I.A No. 394 in W .P. (C) 1699/1987 titled as “ Sudhir Madan & Ors. v. MCD & Ors ” to substantiate his claim that the petitioner has every right to continue at the very same place. 6. As against the above, counsel appearing for MCD has invited our attention to the order of the Division Bench of this Court delivered on 16^th September 2021 in W.P. (C) 9804/2021 titled as “ Shri Sanjeev Kapur vs. North Delhi Municipal Corporation & Ors. ” . According to the counsel, the Division Bench of this Court based on directions issued by the Apex Court in the matter of Sudhir Madan ( supra ), had directed the Executive Engineer of

¶26

This is a digitally signed order.

¶27

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 15/11/2025 at 12:48:44

¶28

North Delhi Municipal Corporation ( NDMC ), as also the Station House Officer (SHO), Police Station Karol Bagh, to ensure that ‘ no-hawking/novending or no encroachment takes place in no-hawking, no-vending zones at Ajmal Khan Road and in particular around Karol Bagh Metro Station .’

¶29

It is also pointed out that directions were also issued to respondent/MCD with regard to installation of permanent display boards within two days at relevant permanent places, declaring the same to be nohawking/no-vending areas. 8. Additionally, counsel for MCD has invited our attention to an order passed by the Division Bench of this Court passed on 22^nd May 2023, in W.P. (C) 6887/2023 titled as “ Hawkers Welfare Committee and Ors. v. Municipal Corporation Delhi & Ors .”, wherein an identical request by a similarly placed person was turned down, and in such eventuality, petitioner cannot be granted the relief claimed.

¶30

According to respondent’s counsel, though petitioner was initially granted allotment vide order dated 5^th September 2001, permitting him tehbazari activity on ‘ Ajmal Khan Road’ , due to change in circumstances, as reflected in Circular dated 06^th June 2021, he was shifted to ‘ Gali No.25, Beadonpura at backside of Police station Karol Bagh, Delhi .’ 10. It is further claimed that even the said site was required to be vacated in compliance with order dated 16^th September 2021, referred above, and as such, vide Circular dated 18^th November 2021, the petitioner has now been allotted another site, and it is still open for petitioner to take possession of the said site to continue his vending activities.

¶31

Our attention has also been invited to inclusion of petitioner at Serial. No.27 in the shifting order of tehbazari from ‘ Ajmal Khan Road’ to ‘ Gali

¶32

This is a digitally signed order.

¶33

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 15/11/2025 at 12:48:44

¶34

No.25, Beadonpura Karol Bagh’ , and thereafter to the ‘ Wall of Ajmal Khan Park at Ajmal Khan Road’ vide Circular dated 18^th November 2021.

¶35

As such, it is claimed that writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

¶36

We have considered the submissions.

¶37

The factual matrix narrated hereinabove depicts that though initially the petitioner was allotted tehbazari rights by virtue of allotment letter dated 5^th September 2001, same was never acted upon.

¶38

It appears that subsequent changes in circumstances viz., the site which was permitted to be used by the petitioner for vending activities, was put to public use and, as such, another order was passed by the competent authority thereby allotting a new site in favour of petitioner, as referred above i.e. vide circular dated 6^th June 2021. The said order also underwent modification in view of order passed by the Division Bench of this Court, referred to supra , and now petitioner has been allotted and permitted to carry out vending activities at ‘ Wall of Ajmal Khan Park at Ajmal Khan Road’ , as can be inferred from circular dated 18^th November 2021.

¶39

Counsel for respondent, on instructions, states that even today, the said option is open for petitioner, and in case he approaches MCD, the site will be marked and tehbazari activity can be permitted to petitioner. 17. We are convinced that contentions have been sufficiently established by counsel for MCD, that not only the vending rights of petitioner are kept intact, but there are sufficient justifiable reasons, that too in public interest, of shifting the site which was initially offered to petitioner under circular dated 5^th September 2001 to that one near ‘ Wall of Ajmal Khan Park at Ajmal Khan Road ’ which was offered vide circular dated 18^th November 2021.

¶40

In that view of the matter, in our opinion, no case is made out for

¶41

This is a digitally signed order.

¶42

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 15/11/2025 at 12:48:44

¶43

interference by issuing directions to the respondent to permit petitioner to carry out vending activity in accordance with order dated 5^th September 2001, as permitting such activity shall be contrary to two subsequent orders passed by this Court, referred in foregoing paragraphs.

¶44

That being so, petition stands dismissed.

¶45

However, we make it clear that it shall be open for petitioner to approach respondent/MCD seeking benefit pursuant to circular dated 18^th November 2021.

¶46

Pending applications are rendered infructuous.

¶47

Date already fixed i.e. 30^th January 2026, stands cancelled.

¶48

Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.

¶49

NITIN WASUDEO SAMBRE, J

¶50

ANISH DAYAL, J

¶51

NOVEMBER 13, 2025/sm/ tk

¶52

This is a digitally signed order.

¶53

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 15/11/2025 at 12:48:44

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
Allotment letter dated 05.09.2001 issued by MCD earmarking a 6x4 tehbazari site on Ajmal Khan Road, opposite Bhasin Crockery, for the petitioner; amount stated to have been paid, but the petitioner was never permitted to continue tehbazari there.¶23
Prior proceeding
Supreme Court order dated 05.05.2000 in I.A No.332-333 in W.P.(C) 1899/1987, Ramesh Kumar v. MCD & Ors, relied on by petitioner for the proposition that persons allotted sites pursuant to the Chopra Committee report cannot be reviewed.¶24
Prior proceeding
Supreme Court order dated 05.05.2006 in I.A No.394 in W.P.(C) 1699/1987, Sudhir Madan & Ors. v. MCD & Ors, cited by petitioner to substantiate a right to continue at the very same place.¶25
Prior proceeding
Division Bench order of Delhi High Court dated 16.09.2021 in W.P.(C) 9804/2021, Shri Sanjeev Kapur vs. North Delhi Municipal Corporation & Ors, directing the Executive Engineer (NDMC) and SHO, PS Karol Bagh to ensure no hawking/vending/encroachment in no-hawking/no-vending zones at Ajmal Khan Road, particularly around Karol Bagh Metro Station, and installation of permanent display boards within two days.¶25
Prior proceeding
Division Bench order of Delhi High Court dated 22.05.2023 in W.P.(C) 6887/2023, Hawkers Welfare Committee and Ors. v. Municipal Corporation Delhi & Ors, whereby an identical request by a similarly placed person was turned down.¶29
Prior proceeding
Circular dated 06.06.2021: due to change in circumstances, petitioner shifted from Ajmal Khan Road to Gali No.25, Beadonpura, at the backside of Police Station Karol Bagh.¶30
Prior proceeding
Circular dated 18.11.2021: after the Beadonpura site was required to be vacated in compliance with the order dated 16.09.2021, petitioner allotted another site, still open for him to take possession.¶30
Prior proceeding
Petitioner included at Serial No.27 in the shifting order of tehbazari from Ajmal Khan Road to Gali No.25, Beadonpura, and thereafter to the Wall of Ajmal Khan Park at Ajmal Khan Road vide circular dated 18.11.2021.¶31

Mr. Ajay Khanna v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Ajay Khanna v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mystic Vs Delhi Pollution Control Committee & Anr.

Union of India and Ors. Vs Karuna Shankar Dubey and Ors.

Shri Daulat Ram Lamba Vs the Union of India & Ors.

Union of India and Ors. Vs Sgt Abhishek Kumar (Retd.)

Inder Singh Since Deceased through Lr Krishan Rana Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Shangri-La International Hotel Management Pte. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Income-Tax (International TAX)-3, Delhi & Ors.

Staff Selection Commission & Anr. Vs Vishal Samadhiya

Mantosh Das Vs Hamdard Public School and Ors.

Cipla Health Limited Vs Zydus Wellness Products Limited & Anr.

Zydus Wellness Products Limited Vs Cipla Health Ltd. & Anr.

Mr Manoj Kumar Jayaswal Vs National Highway Authority of India & Anr.

Vipin Dhir Vs Atul Gupta

The New India Assurance Company Limited Vs M/S Shiv Shakti Products Limited

Vipin Dhir Vs Ram Narain Gupta