Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 09.09.2025
KALYAN PRATAP SINGH .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vinay Kr. Garg, Sr. Adv.
Rekhi, Advs. Mob: 9671356191 Email: nariyala1289@gmail.com
Through: Mr. Tushar Sannu, SC-MCD Mob: 9911991166
Ms. Manika Tripathy, SC for R-DDA
Mob: 9811831835 Email: manikatripathy@yahoo.com
PUJA KUMARI .....Petitioner MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents
Mr. Sanjay Vashishtha, Mr. Siddhartha Goswami, Ms. Geetanjali Reddy and Mr. Aditya Sachdeva, Advs. for R-DDA
Mob: 9999753811 Email: v10communication@outlook.com
MANISH GOSWAMI & ANR. .....Petitioners
SUSHILA GIRSA .....Petitioner
SUMAN .....Petitioner
Email: latika.malhotra@gmail.com Email:
HORIL PRASAD .....Petitioner
VC)
Mob: 9999388384 Email: puneetyadavadvocate@gmail.com
JEESHAN ALI .....Petitioner DDA
LAKHPATI DEVI .....Petitioner
VIRMATI DEVI .....Petitioner
RAJESH MISHRA .....Petitioner
DDA
& CM APPL. 56653/2025
JUDGMENT
1. The present applications have been filed on behalf of the petitioners seeking permission to run and sell fish, chicken and mutton in the stalls in question, at the Dabri Mor Fruit and Vegetable Market.
2. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioner have been engaged in the business of selling fish, chicken and mutton in different shops at the Dabri Mor Pocket 20C, Palam Road, New Delhi. It is submitted that the petitioners are the legal owners of the thadas/units/stalls, which have been duly allotted by the Delhi Development Authority (“DDA”) to the petitioners.
3. It is submitted that in terms of the Master Plan of Delhi 2021, a License to the meat shops running on the ground floor of residential areas, up to maximum of 20 sq. metres, are allowed. Thus, it is submitted that Municipal Corporation of Delhi (“MCD”) has notified a new Policy dated 20th December, 2023, in terms of which license is granted to sell meat subject to completion of all the terms and conditions as per the policy.
4. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners relies upon the Policy of the MCD, which has been issued vide Office Order dated 20th December, 2023, by the Department of Veterinary Services, and relies upon Clause C of the said Policy. By relying upon the aforesaid Policy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are covered under the said Policy, and therefore, must be allowed to run their respective business from their allotted units.
5. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are ready to approach the MCD, and shall comply with all the directions as given by the MCD, in accordance with law.
6. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners initially had Licenses from the DDA and the MCD, for running their businesses from their respective units. However, the same were subsequently withdrawn, as per the Policy prevailing at that point of time.
7. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have deposited fees of Rs. 7500/-, towards grant of License on various occasions, however, the applications of the petitioners have been rejected. He submits that the petitioners are poor people, thus, in case, the petitioners are to approach the respondents, they may be exempted from filing the fees.
8. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners relies upon the judgment dated 12th August, 2025, passed by this Court, in W.P.(C) 12160/2025, titled as “Umar Sarif Versus Government of NCT of Delhi and Ors.”, to submit that the cases of the petitioners herein are also covered by the said judgment.
9. Issue notice. Notice is accepted by learned counsels appearing for the respondents, i.e., the MCD and the DDA.
10. Learned counsels appearing for the respondents submit that action was taken for cancelling the Licenses of the petitioners, in terms of the directions of the Court.
11. Learned counsels appearing for the respondents also point out that the letter for clarification was written to the Director General of Civil Aviations, seeking clarifications.
12. At this stage, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are ready to comply with all the requisite directions issued by the MCD in this regard, for the purposes of de-sealing. He further submits that the petitioners are willing to subject themselves to the terms, as may be put by the MCD, in this regard.
13. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners further submits that the petitioners are not slaughtering any mutton or big animals, which are prohibited under Rule 91 of the Aircraft Rules, 1937. He submits that the petitioners shall comply with all the compliances in terms of Rule 91 of the Aircraft Rule, 1937.
14. Having heard learned counsels appearing for the parties, this Court notes that Rule 91 of the Aircraft Rules, 1937 reads as under:
15. Perusal of the aforesaid Rule categorically shows that no person shall slaughter or flay any animal or deposit or drop any rubbish, filth, garbage or any other polluted or obnoxious matter, including, such material which attracts or is likely to attract vultures or other birds and animals within a radius of ten kilometers from the aerodrome reference point. The said Rule further provides that if the Director General or the Joint Director General of Civil Aviation or Deputy Director General of Civil Aviation, as the case may be, is satisfied that proper and adequate arrangements have been made by the owners of the meat shops/fish shops etc., so as to prevent attraction of vultures or other birds and animals having regard to the vicinity of place in question from the aerodrome, then permission in writing for that purpose can be granted.
16. This Court notes the letter dated 20th September, 2018, issued by the DDA, Commercial Estate Branch, wherein, with regard to compliances in accordance with Rule 91 of Aircraft Rules, 1937, it is stated as follows: “xxx xxx xxx Please refer to your letter dated 30.08.2018 on the subject noted above. In this connection, I am to inform you that the matter for running/selling of Fish/Chicken/Mutton in Dabri Mori Fruit & Vegetable Market has been considered by the Competent Authority and has granted permission for selling of Fish/Chicken/Mutton on the ground that the allottee were doing the same business prior to allotment in this site after re-sitement and further subject to fulfilling of Rule 91 of the Aircraft Rule 1937.
2. In addition to above, the said permission for selling of Chicken/Mutton/Fish is subject to furnishing of an Indemnity Bond for compliance on the following in accordance with the Rule 91 of Aircraft Rule 1937:i). The drainage system should be properly managed. ii). The disposal bins/drums are completely covered individually apart from the whole area being covered with proper covering material. iii). No slaughter of chicken/fish is to be done in open area. iv). The Disposal of carcass, other waste, material is to be stored properly in drums during the day time and only in the night i.e. after
9.00 p.m. they are to be disposed by the covered vehicle. v). There should be no scope of any vultures or any other birds being attracted by any sort of waste material from the business carried out by the allottee/occupant. It is also informed you that a periodical survey would be conducted by the team consisting of Officers of DDA, ATC, SDMC & Association by the Fruit & Vegetable Market, Dabri More to Check for compliance of Rule 91 by all concerned and in case of violation, the allotment would be liable to be cancelled.
4. The Association namely M/s Shiv Market Phal-Subzi Mandi, Main Dabri Mor, New Delhi would ensure that proper arrangement if further needed for disposal or deposit of carcass/any other polluted and obnoxious mater to ensure that no vultures/birds are attracted towards this market. xxx xxx xxx” (Emphasis Supplied)
17. Perusal of the aforesaid letter issued by the DDA shows that there is a clear requirement that no slaughter of chicken/fish is to be done in open area. Further, the disposal of the carcass and other waste material is to be stored properly in drums during the day and only in the night after 9 p.m., the said waste material is to be disposed of, by covered vehicle. Thus, the petitioners would be required to comply with all these directions and ensure that the disposal of carcass and other waste material is stored properly and no slaughter of chicken/fish is done in an open area. Further, the petitioners would also have to ensure that there is no scope of any vultures or other birds being attracted or any sort of waste material from the business being carried out by the allottee/occupants.
18. Therefore, the petitioners are enjoined upon to comply with all these directions with respect to compliances in terms of Rule 91 of Aircraft Rules,
1937.
19. This Court also notes the letter dated 29th May, 2018, issued by the Office of the Director General of Civil Aviation, which reads as under:
20. Perusal of the aforesaid letter shows that the Civil Aviation Department, Government of India has already clarified that the slaughtering of animals is prohibited under Rule 91 of the Aircraft Rule, 1937, within a radius of 10 kilometers from aerodrome. Further, the Civil Aviation Department has also clarified that individual shop owners, who do business in small scale, may dispose waste from shop, in a manner as required by the Aircraft Rule, 1937. Thus, the Office of the Director General of Civil Aviation, Civil Aviation Department, Government of India, has clarified that in cases permissions are granted, it may be ensured that activities undertaken by the individual shop owners do not violate the provisions of Rule 91 of the Aircraft Rule, 1937.
21. Further, this Court takes note of the letter dated 19th April, 2018, issued by the Delhi International Airport Limited (“DIAL”), which reads as follows:
22. Perusal of the aforesaid letter issued by the DIAL clearly shows that it is the stand of DIAL that, in case the Director General of Civil Aviation is satisfied that proper and adequate arrangements have been made by the respective owners of meat shops etc., so as to prevent attraction of vultures or other birds and animals, having regard to the vicinity of the place in question and there are proper arrangements for disposal of deposit carcass, rubbish etc., the Director General of Civil Aviation DGCA may grant permission.
23. Accordingly, it is evident that the petitioners are required to comply with various directions in terms of Rule 91 of the Aircraft Rules, 1937.
24. Further, this Court notes the Policy of the MCD issued by the Department of Veterinary Services, vide Office Order dated 20th December, 2023, relevant portion of which, is reproduced as under: “xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx”
25. Thus, it is evident that MCD has its Policy for grant of new/renewal of license to platforms/thadas, as allotted by the DDA at different locations in the jurisdiction of MCD, including, the area in question, i.e., Dabri Mor. Reading of the aforesaid Policy of the MCD makes it apparent that there are various conditions which have to be fulfilled for the purpose of grant of license for sale of meat, chicken, fish, from licensed platforms/thadas.
26. Accordingly, 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.
(iv) The petitioners shall be called for personal hearing through themselves or through their authorized representatives, at the time of considering their representations.
(v) The respondents shall carry out inspection of the premises of the petitioners, in order to assess the status of the premises of the petitioners, for their compliances in terms of the Policy of the MCD.
(vi) The DDA and MCD shall satisfy themselves that the petitioners comply with the various compliances in terms of Rule 91 of the Aircraft Rules, 1937.
(vii) Representation of the petitioners shall be duly considered in terms of the policy of the MCD, issued vide Office Order dated 20th December, 2023, by the Department of Veterinary Services, MCD.
(viii) Requisite order for grant of license by the DDA and MCD shall be issued in favour of the petitioners, subject to the petitioners complying with all the requisite directions and fulfilling the various compliances in terms of the policy of the MCD, as well as Rule 91 of the Aircraft Rules, 1937.
(ix) The requisite orders in the applications of the petitioners shall be passed within a period of four weeks, from today.
(x) The petitioners shall be exempted from paying any fresh fees towards grant of license, wherever said fees already stand paid by the petitioners, on previous occasions.
27. With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petitions, along with the pending applications, are accordingly disposed of.
28. The next date of hearing, i.e., 24th November, 2025, stands cancelled. MINI PUSHKARNA, J SEPTEMBER 9, 2025