On Monday, July 22, the Supreme Court of India placed an interim stay on the orders issued by the Uttar Pradesh (UP) and Uttarakhand governments. These orders had mandated that hotels, restaurants, and food shops on the Kanwar Yatra route disclose the names of their owners and employees.
A division bench comprising Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice SVN Bhatti ruled that while shop owners can display the type of food served, they are not required to display their names, castes, or the names of their employees.
The next Hearing on July 26
The Supreme Court has issued notices to the governments of Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, and Madhya Pradesh, seeking a response by July 26, when the next hearing is scheduled.
During the hearing, the petitioner’s lawyer highlighted concerns that past instances of feeding wrong items to Kanwar pilgrims had led to this mandate. They argued that it should be sufficient to label food as vegetarian, pure vegetarian, or Jain diet, without needing to disclose the seller’s name.
Legal and Economic Concerns
Justice Hrishikesh Roy noted that the directive was stated as voluntary. However, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Mahua Moitra, argued it was not voluntary, citing a Haridwar Police order that threatened strict action against non-compliance. The lawyer emphasized that such requirements are economically damaging to vendors, requiring extensive disclosures that go beyond food types.
Also read: India’s Labour Market Sees Improvement, Unemployment Rate Down To 3.2%: Economic Survey
Government Orders and Their Impact
Singhvi argued that there was no formal government order but rather indirect implementation through police instructions. He mentioned the long-standing tradition of the Kanwar Yatra, questioning the necessity of such measures now.
Security, Standards, and Secularism
Justice SVN Bhatti pointed out the need to balance security, standards, and secularism. He questioned whether Kanwariyas, the pilgrims, have specific expectations regarding the food’s origin or the identity of the shopkeeper.
Singhvi contended that the Food Safety Act only requires displaying calories and whether the food is vegetarian or non-vegetarian. Justice Bhatti added that licenses must also be displayed, sharing his personal experience of choosing a Muslim-owned vegetarian hotel in Kerala for its high hygiene standards.
Petitions Against the Orders
The petitions challenging these orders were filed by the NGO ‘Association of Protection of Civil Rights’, Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra, Professor Apoorvanand, and writer Aakar Patel. They argued that these orders violate constitutional rights, disproportionately affecting marginalized communities and supporting practices akin to untouchability, which is prohibited under Article 17 of the Indian Constitution. The petitioners claimed the orders infringe on rights under Articles 14, 15, and 19(1)(g).
On July 19, the UP government had mandated that all shopkeepers along the Kanwar Yatra route display the names of the shop owners, particularly those selling food and beverages. The Supreme Court’s stay on this order now places the focus on the upcoming hearing and the responses from the involved state governments.
