Mehfooz Ahmed & Anr. v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Anr.

1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking quashing/setting aside the Official Order dated 24th July, 2024, issued by the Deputy Director, Delhi Development Authority (“DDA”) Commercial Estate Branch, and issuance of directions for commanding/directing the respondent no.1- Municipal Corporation of Delhi (“MCD”), to grant Veterinary License to the petitioners.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been engaged in the business of selling Fish/Chicken and Mutton in the Shop/Stall No. 13 at Fruit, Vegetable and Fish Market (DDA Main Market) at Dabri Mor Pocket 20C, Palam Road, New Delhi, before the survey of the site took place in the year 2004, and construction of 288 platforms.

3. It is submitted that the petitioners are the legal owners of the thara/unit/stall no. 13 via draw dated 28th March, 2002.

4. It is submitted that the petitioners have fulfilled the criteria as per the policy of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (“MCD”) dated 20th December, 2023, for the issuance of the Veterinary License for running/ selling of fish, chicken, wherein the new policy for the grant of license to the meat shops, meat procession/packaging/storage plants/factories/unit and registration of the platforms/thadas allotted by the DDA/government agencies for the sale of chicken and fish in the jurisdiction of MCD, has been allowed.

5. It is further submitted that this Court has already dealt with similar issue and passed orders on 12th August, 2025 in W.P.(C) 12160/2025 and order dated 09th September, 2025 passed in W.P.(C) 3595/2025.

6. Thus, he prays that similar orders be passed in the present petition also.

7. Issue notice. Notice is accepted by learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

8. Learned counsel for the MCD submits that similar orders have already been passed by this Court. However, he draws the attention of this Court to the policy issued by the Veterinary Services Department of MCD and in particular, relies upon Clause 7 of the same policy, which reads as under: “xxx xxx xxx

7. If a meat shop/premises is sealed due to any violation of the provision of this policy, an amount of Rs.20,000/- (Rs. Twenty thousand only) shall be charged as processing fee for de-sealing for the first time. If, the same meat shop is sealed subsequently on account of violation of terms and conditions of the Policy or due to any other reason whatsoever, an amount of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty thousand only) each time shall be charged for de-sealing of the meat shop from the meat shopkeeper. xxx xxx xxx”

9. By referring to the aforesaid, learned counsel for respondent no. 1- MCD submits that the petitioners would be required to pay the aforesaid amount, as process fee, for de-sealing.

10. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have no objection to payment of the said amount.

11. Considering the submissions made before this Court, it is directed as follows:

(i) The petitioners shall make representations to the Deputy

(ii) Upon the representations being made by the petitioners, the respective cases of the petitioners for withdrawal of the order of revocation of Veterinary Trade License, as well as revocation of license by the DDA, including, de-sealing of their premises, shall be considered and disposed of by the concerned officials of the MCD and DDA, within a period of four weeks.

(iii) At the time of considering the representations of the petitioners, the concerned officials of DDA and MCD shall coordinate with each other, so that the representations of the petitioners are dealt in a comprehensive manner.