On Monday (22nd July), the Supreme Court of India passed an Interim order prohibiting the enforcement of orders recently passed by the Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand governments that directed eateries to display the names of owners and operators.
The court has issued notices to the UP, Uttarakhand, and Madhya Pradesh governments and has asked the administrations not to force the eatery owners to display their names or of their employees. Instead, they now will have to display food type instead, that is, whether they serve vegetarian or non-vegetarian food.
Following the interim order passed by the bench, Kanwariyas will now not be able to know whether the eateries where they are eating are being run by an ‘Abdul’ or an ‘Abhishek’ as eateries have been asked to display only food type. The two-judge bench comprising Justices Hrishikesh Roy and SVN Bhatti heard the matter.
J Roy: It is also seen that implication of directives is spread across multiple states…let notice in these petitions be issued. Returnable on Friday. Notices to UP, Uttarakhand, MP…#SupremeCourt #KanwarYatra
— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) July 22, 2024
The bench has asked the representative states to file their responses by Friday following the interim order.
Dictating the order, the bench said, “Let notice be issued in all these petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution. Made returnable on coming Friday. Dasti permitted for standing counsel of UP, Uttarakhand, Madhya Pradesh.”
The bench added, “Until the returnable date, having regard to the above discussion, we deem it appropriate to pass an interim order prohibiting the enforcement of the above directives. In other words, the affected owners have to display the type of food but not the names of owners and staff employed”.
Order: Until the returnable date, having regard to the above discussion, we deem it appropriate to pass an interim order prohibiting the enforcement of the above directives. In other words, the affected owners have to display the type of food but not the names.
— Bar and Bench (@barandbench) July 22, 2024
Counsel: Obliged.
Notably, the petitioners, Apoorvanand Jha and Aakar Patel approached the Supreme Court to challenge the UP and Uttarakhand governments’ order for eateries falling on the Kanwar Yatra routes. They were represented by Senior Advocate Huzefa Ahmadi before the bench. Mahua Moitra, another petitioner in the case, was represented by Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi in the top court. However, the bench noted that no one made arguments from the side of the UP and Uttarakhand governments.
During the hearing, Justice Bhatti had asked petitioners’ counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi to not exaggerate things. He observed, “Dr Singhvi, let us also not exaggerate what is happening on the ground level. These orders have dimensions of safety and hygiene also. Your contention is it is leading to exclusion, correct? Let us narrate without exaggeration.”
Singhvi: In a lighter and serious vein, one does not enter a restaurant for name of owner but the food.
— Bar and Bench (@barandbench) July 22, 2024
Justice Bhatti: Dr Singhvi, let us also not exaggerate what is happening on the ground level. These orders have dimensions of safety and hygiene also. Your contention is it…
He noted that the orders has 3 dimensions – safety, standard, and secularism, and that all 3 are equally important.
J Bhatti: Let us not narrate situation in such a way that it's more exaggerated that what is on ground…it has 3 dimensions – safety, standard and secularism. All 3 are equally important#SupremeCourt #KanwarYatra
— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) July 22, 2024
However, the court passed interim order following the arguments of the petitioners’ counsel that the reservation of hygiene could be achieved merely by the display of food type.
Following the arguments of the petitioners’ counsels and since none of the counsel representing the UP and Uttarakhand governments approached the bench, the bench issued the interim order prohibiting the enforcement of these directives of the state governments. The bench also issued notices to the representative governments.
