Facts of the Case

This batch of writ petitions, led by Perch (a unit of Sunrise F&B Restaurant Pvt. Ltd.), was filed by several fine-dining restaurants operating mainly in Khan Market, within the jurisdiction of the New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC). The petitioners' health and trade licences had not been renewed since around 2020-2021 because the Delhi Fire Service (DFS) had refused to issue a No Objection Certificate (Fire NOC), taking the position that the restaurant premises qualified as 'assembly buildings' under the National Building Code, requiring compliance with capacity and safety norms. The petitioners argued that their restaurants did not require a Fire NOC at all, since only the dining area — not the whole building — should count toward the fifty-person threshold that triggers the Fire NOC requirement. During the pendency of the litigation, on 23.02.2026, NDMC issued a notification clarifying that a separate health trade licence would not be mandatory for an existing establishment that already holds a valid FSSAI or GST registration. This is fundamentally a fire-safety and municipal-licensing case; GST features only as one of two alternative registrations (the other being FSSAI) that NDMC accepted as sufficient proof of an establishment's bona fides for deemed-licence purposes — it is not a case about any substantive GST liability or dispute.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the petitioners' restaurants could be denied renewal of health/trade licences solely for want of a Fire NOC.
  2. Whether the entire building area, or only the dining area, should be reckoned in determining whether the premises qualify as an 'assembly building' requiring Fire NOC under the National Building Code.
  3. What conditions, if any, should govern continued operation of the restaurants pending full compliance with fire-safety norms.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The restaurants do not require a Fire NOC because only the dining area, and not the whole building, should be considered while computing seating/occupancy capacity under Clause 4.3 of the National Building Code.
  • The petitioners had earlier obtained and had their health licences renewed without any Fire NOC requirement being insisted upon; NDMC's abrupt insistence on Fire NOC was without basis.
  • The petitioners undertook to cap occupancy at fifty persons at any given time to address the safety concern practically.

Respondent's Arguments

  • DFS maintained that under Rule 34 of the Delhi Fire Service Rules, 2010, framed under the Delhi Fire Services Act, 2007, the petitioners' premises qualified as 'assembly buildings' under Clause 3.1.5 of the National Building Code since their floor area indicated capacity for more than fifty persons under Clause 4.3.
  • NDMC, in coordination with DFS, worked towards a practical mechanism rather than opposing the petitions outright, and eventually issued the 23.02.2026 notification treating a valid FSSAI or GST registration as sufficient for a deemed licence.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court declined to resolve on merits whether the entire building or only the dining area should be used to compute occupancy, and instead facilitated a negotiated, practical compliance framework between the parties.
  • The petitioners were held bound by their undertaking to cap occupancy at fifty persons.
  • They were directed not to be denied permission to operate solely for lack of Fire NOC, so long as the fifty-person cap is maintained and can be monitored through technological tools.
  • The petitioners were directed to install and maintain automatic fire detection/alarm systems and fire-fighting equipment, ensure electrical and fuel safety compliance, maintain clear ingress/egress, train staff for emergencies, avoid major structural changes without approval, coordinate inspections with DFS/NDMC, and submit quarterly self-attested Fire Safety Audits.
  • Any future action for lack of Fire NOC required 30 days' prior notice to the petitioners.
  • With these directions, all the connected petitions were disposed of.

Important Clarification

For restaurant and hospitality operators, the takeaway is entirely about fire-safety compliance, not GST: holding a valid GST (or FSSAI) registration can now support a deemed licence route with NDMC in Delhi for certain trades, but it does not substitute for actual compliance with fire-safety norms — occupancy caps, fire-fighting equipment, and periodic safety audits remain independently enforceable.

Sections Involved

  • New Delhi Municipal Council Act, 1994 — Sections 318, 325, 327, 330, 331 and 332, concerning trade and health licences and the deemed-licence notification relied upon.
  • Delhi Fire Service Act, 2007 — the parent statute for fire-safety regulation of assembly buildings.
  • Delhi Fire Service Rules, 2010 — Rule 34, governing Fire Clearance Certificates/Fire NOC for buildings covered under Rule 27.
  • Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 — referenced only incidentally, as GST registration was accepted as one form of proof for the deemed trade-licence notification.

Decision – In Favour of

Disposed of by consent-based directions rather than a ruling for either side on the Fire NOC question — the petitioners were allowed to continue operating subject to a detailed, ongoing fire-safety compliance regime, and no final view was expressed on whose interpretation of the occupancy-computation clause was correct.

Case Details

  • Court: High Court of Delhi at New Delhi
  • Case Number: W.P.(C) 5706/2021 with connected petitions (W.P.(C) 2913/2020, 10090/2021, 11538/2021, 11763/2021, 12901/2021, 12902/2021, 15143/2021, 15157/2021, 644/2022, 6633/2022, 8662/2022, 8663/2022, 8672/2022, 9124/2022, 1495/2023, 2028/2025 and others)
  • Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav
  • Date of Decision: 10.04.2026

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.