Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Sonu vs Robin Baleja, Chief Executive Officer (Ceo), Delhi Cantonment Board and Anr.

SONU vs Robin Baleja, Chief Executive Officer (Ceo), Delhi Cantonment Board and Anr.

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Mar 23, 2026
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1257399

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Delhi High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
CONT.CAS(C)/313/2026
Subject
Right to Information

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Right to Information

Key legal issue
Right to Information

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

SONU

Respondent

Robin Baleja, Chief Executive Officer (Ceo), Delhi Cantonment Board and Anr.

Excerpt

.....the representation dated 26.05.2025 and 11.11.2025 made by the petitioner herein and annexed with the present petition as annexure p-6 &annexure p7vi. pass any such directions or order that this hon’ble court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the above-mentioned case.”2. representation dated 11th november 2025 addressed to respondentno.1/delhi cantonment board is pending for consideration.3. petitioner, for the purpose of substantiating the claim of carrying outvending activity has sought to draw support of challan issued by delhi cantonment board.4. in this background, it is open for respondent no.1 to decide the saidrepresentation within a period of four weeks from today.5. counsel for respondent no.1 has opposed the prayer on the ground thatthe survey has already been completed and petitioner has only recently started vending activity, as could be inferred from the challans sought to be relied upon.6. accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of.7. pending applications are also rendered infructuous.”3. it transpires that in the aftermath of the aforesaid order, a meeting ofthe town vending committee (tvc) was held pursuant to which, similar communications came to be issued to the petitioners in these matters. the communication dated 29.01.2026 issued to the petitioner in cont.cas(c)4. pursuant thereto, the petitioners are stated to have addressed anothercommunication to the chief executive officer, delhi cantonment board responding to the aforesaid communication, including three challans issued to them prior to 27.12.2023. the matter is, thereafter, stated to be under consideration of the concerned authority.5. learned counsel for the respondents submits that to consider thedocuments supplied by the petitioners, another meeting of tvc shall be convened within a period of three weeks from today, wherein, appropriatedecision shall be taken as regards the request/ representation of the.....

Full Judgment

$~2 to 4

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CONT.CAS(C) 313/2026 and CM APPL.18003/2026

(2) SONU .....Petitioner

+ CONT.CAS(C) 314/2026 and CM APPL.18004/2026

(3) CHANDER KESH .....Petitioner

+ CONT.CAS(C) 316/2026 and CM APPL.18002/2026

(4) DINESH .....Petitioner

Presence: Mr. Sanjay Baniwal, Ms. Manisha and Mr. R. K. Seewal, Advocates for Petitioner in Item Nos.2 to 4. Mr. Ankur Mishra, Advocate for Respondent (through VC) in Item Nos.2 to 4. Mr. Ravindra Vikram Singh, Sr. Panel Counsel along with Mr. V. K. Singh, Mr. Ankit Prasad and Mr. Kunal Pal, Advocates for R-2 in Item No.3. Mr. Niraj Kumar, SPC along with Mr. Kushagra Sachdeva, GP for R-2 in Item No.4. Ms. Shagun Shahi Chugh, SPC along with Mr. Kushagra Sachdeva, GP for R-2 in Item Nos.3 and 4.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA

ORDER

% 23.03.2026

1. The present petitions have been filed by the petitioners alleging wilful

disobedience of directions contained in orders dated 01.12.2025 passed in W.P(C) 18126/2025 [in CONT.CAS(C) 313/2026] and W.P(C)18175/2025 [in CONT.CAS(C) 314/2026] and also order dated 28.11.2025 passed in W.P(C) 18058/2025 [in CONT.CAS(C) 316/2026]. The directions contained in the aforesaid orders are identical in nature.

2. The order dated 01.12.2025 passed in W.P.(C) No.18126/2025 reads

as under:- “1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking following prayers:-

I. Pass an order directing the respondents to consider grant of vending certificate to the petitioner in terms of section 4 (2) of THE STREET VENDORS

(PROTECTION OF LIVELIHOOD AND

REGULATION OF STREET VENDING) ACT, 2014

and as has requested by the petitioner vide his representation dated 26.05.2025 and 11.11.2025 at ANNEXURE P-6 and P-7 (Of the present petition)

II. Pass an order directing the respondents more especially the officials and agents of Delhi Police to honour the resolution of the Town Vending Committee dated 04.09.2023 at ANNEXURE P-1 and thereby restrain them from causing any obstruction in the peaceful vending activity of the petitioner.

III. Pass an order directing the respondent Delhi Cantonment board to formulate vending Plan in terms of section 21 of the THE STREET VENDORS

PROTECTION OF LIVELIHOOD AND REGULATION

OF STREET VENDING) ACT, 2014.

IV. For an directing the respondents to ensure that the petitioner be allowed to peacefully vend at his designated vending site i.e., at open space beyond the

footpath, near pillar no. 65, Ridge Road, Near Army Public School, Rij Road, Dhaula Kuan, New Delhi, Delhi Cantonment, Nangal Raya, Delhi Cantonment, New Delhi, Delhi - 110021, till the time petitioner is not duly surveyed and issued with the vending certificate in accordance with section 4 (2) read with section 3 (3) of the Act be granted to him.

V. Pass an order directing the respondents to consider and decide the representation dated 26.05.2025 and 11.11.2025 made by the petitioner herein and annexed with the present petition as ANNEXURE P-6 &

ANNEXURE P7

VI. Pass any such directions or order that this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the above-mentioned case.”

2. Representation dated 11th November 2025 addressed to respondent

no.1/Delhi Cantonment Board is pending for consideration.

3. Petitioner, for the purpose of substantiating the claim of carrying out

vending activity has sought to draw support of challan issued by Delhi Cantonment Board.

4. In this background, it is open for respondent no.1 to decide the said

representation within a period of four weeks from today.

5. Counsel for respondent no.1 has opposed the prayer on the ground that

the survey has already been completed and petitioner has only recently started vending activity, as could be inferred from the challans sought to be relied upon.

6. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of.

7. Pending applications are also rendered infructuous.”

3. It transpires that in the aftermath of the aforesaid order, a meeting of

the Town Vending Committee (TVC) was held pursuant to which, similar communications came to be issued to the petitioners in these matters. The communication dated 29.01.2026 issued to the petitioner in CONT.CAS(C)

4. Pursuant thereto, the petitioners are stated to have addressed another

communication to the Chief Executive Officer, Delhi Cantonment Board responding to the aforesaid communication, including three challans issued to them prior to 27.12.2023. The matter is, thereafter, stated to be under consideration of the concerned Authority.

5. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that to consider the

documents supplied by the petitioners, another meeting of TVC shall be convened within a period of three weeks from today, wherein, appropriate

decision shall be taken as regards the request/ representation of the petitioners for issuance of a ‘Certificate of Vending’. The said statement is taken on record.

6. Let the necessary exercise be completed within the aforesaid period.

7. The petition is disposed of in the above terms.

8. If the exercise is not completed within the aforesaid period, the

respondents shall not pose any impediment to the vending activities of the petitioners. Pending applications also stand disposed of.

SACHIN DATTA, J

MARCH 23, 2026/r

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial