Supreme Court stays UP’s nameplate diktat for eateries along Kanwar Yatra route

Satya Prakash

New Delhi, July 22

The Supreme Court on Monday ordered an interim stay on the Uttar Pradesh Government’s controversial directive to eateries on the Kanwar Yatra route to display the names of their owners.

Used to visit veg hotel run by Muslim: judge

• Justice SVN Bhatti, one of the judges on the SC Bench, recalled how he used to visit a vegetarian restaurant run by a Muslim in Kerala as it maintained international standards
• During the hearing, Justice Bhatti said, “I have my experience and knowledge when I was in Kerala. I may not state openly as I am a sitting judge of this court. Without disclosing the name of the city, there is a vegetarian hotel run by a Hindu. There is another vegetarian hotel run by a Muslim.”
• “As a judge of that state, I was going to the hotel run by a Muslim for vegetarian food. When it comes to food standard and safety, he was displaying everything… it was my choice to go to that hotel,” he said while hearing petitions

The ex-parte order came from a Bench of Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice SVN Bhatt on petitions filed by the Association for Protection of Civil Rights, TMC MP Mahua Moitra, Prof Apoorvanand Jha and others challenging the validity of the directive.

Issuing notices to the governments of Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Uttarakhand and some other states where Kanwar Yatra takes place, the Bench posted the matter for further hearing on July 26.

“We deem it appropriate to pass an interim order prohibiting the enforcement of the above directives. In other words, the food sellers, hawkers, etc. may be required to display the kind of food they are serving to Kanwariyas, but they must not be forced to disclose the names of owners and staff employed,” the Bench said, staying the UP Government’s order till the next date of hearing.

On behalf of the petitioners, senior counsel AM Singhvi, C Uday Singh and Huzefa Ahmadi submitted that the UP’s directive went against secularism and was aimed at exclusion by identity.

“Impugned directives encourage discrimination on the grounds of caste and religion and cannot be seen to serve any ‘legitimate purpose’. These directives promote discrimination solely based on religious and caste identity as they do not require the display of food items being served or a statement that no non-vegetarian or non-satvik food is being served, but only the display of religious or caste identity explicit in one’s name. This directly breaches Article 15 of the Constitution,” read one of the petitions.