Nazma v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Others

1. The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950, has been instituted on behalf of the petitioner, praying as follows:- ‘A. To pass an appropriate writ, order and mandamus thereby directing the respondent No. 1 to 3 to allow the petitioner to do her business in the area falling in Rohini Zone, MCD, Delhi and not to create any hindrance or interference in peaceful functioning of his business by the petitioner and to stop the violation of fundamental rights of the petitioner and discharging of her duties by the respondents in accordance with law and byelaws, in the interest of justice. Any other relief/reliefs may also be granted in favour of the petitioner and against the respondent, which this Hon’ble court deems fit and proper in accordance with circumstances of the case.’

2. Issue notice.

3. Ms. Tajinder Virdi, learned Standing Counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the MCD and Mr. Divyam Nandrajog, learned panel counsel accepts notice on behalf of the GNCTD.

4. Learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the MCD, has invited our attention to the terms and conditions, permitting the petitioner to vend.

5. For the sake of completeness, the said terms and conditions attached to the Certificate of Vending, are reproduced herein below:-

6. In terms of the Certificate of Vending issued to the petitioner, it is clearly stipulated that he cannot vend from any particular location, contrary to the express terms of Clause no. ‘11’, of the said Certificate of Vending. It is further observed that since the Town Vending Committee (TVC) is yet to fix a time limit, providing for a period, during which a vendor can vend from any particular spot, the stipulation of 30 minutes time, contained in the said clause, is binding on the petitioner, at this stage. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner states, that he does not pray for the relief of running her business from any particular vending site, within the zone where she has been permitted to vend by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, and further, the limited relief that is prayed for, is to permit the petitioner to vend strictly, in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Certificate of Vending dated 06.11.2021, issued by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi.

7. It is an admitted position that the Town Vending Committee (TVC), has in terms of the directions issued by this Court, from time to time, as well as, in terms of the mandate of Section 3 (Survey of street vendors and protection from eviction on relocation) and Section 4 (Issue of certificate of vending) of the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014, carried out a survey, in some of the areas under the MCD zones; pursuant to which, the petitioner, namely, Ms. Nazma, has been issued a certificate of vending dated 06.11.2021 (URI: 6910414), which is annexed as Annexure P-2 (colly), to the present writ petition.

8. In view of the foregoing, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, categorically limits the relief in the present writ petition, to a direction to the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, to permit Ms. Nazma, to continue to vend within Rohini, Ward- 25-N, strictly and scrupulously in compliance with the terms and conditions of the said certificate of vending, particularly Clause no. 11, and in accordance with law.

9. In view of the above, the present writ petition is partly allowed; and the Municipal Corporation of Delhi is directed to permit Ms. Nazma, the petitioner herein, to vend within Rohini, Ward- 25-N, subject to the terms and conditions of the aforementioned certificate of vending dated 06.11.2021, without any let or hindrance.