Kanwar Yatra : Supreme Court Extends Stay Of UP, Uttarakhand Directives To Eateries To Display Owner & Staff Names

The Supreme Court on Friday (July 26) extended the interim order staying the directives of the Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand governments that the eateries along the Kanwariya pilgrim route must display the names of the owners and the staff.

The stay order will continue till August 5, the next hearing date.

A bench comprising Justices Hrishikesh Roy and SVN Bhatti was hearing the petitions filed by the Association for Protection of Civil Rights, TMC MP Mahua Moitra, Professor Apoorvanand and columnist Aakar Patel against the directives of the UP and Uttarakhand governments.

When the matter was taken up, Senior Advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Moitra, submitted that the Uttar Pradesh Government filed a counter-affidavit at 10:30 PM yesterday and time was required to file a rejoinder.

Stating that the counter-affidavit has not come on record, the bench agreed to adjourn the matter.

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the State of Uttar Pradesh, submitted that the regulations under the Central law Food and Safety Standards Act, 2006 require every food seller, including dhabas, to display the names of the owners. The interim order passed by the Court staying the directive to display names of the owners was not in line with this Central law, Rohatgi submitted, as it was not brought to its notice by the petitioners.

If there is any such law, then the State should be enforcing it throughout all areas, the bench stated.

"Then let it be enforced all across...not only in certain areas. File a counter showing it has been enforced all over..." Justice Roy said. Rohatgi requested for an early hearing of the matter, preferably next Monday or Tuesday, saying that the matter will otherwise become infructuous as the Kanwar yatra period will be over in two week. He added that the petitioners had the duty to inform the Court about the existence of such a law.

In response, Singhvi submitted that since there was no mandate to display owners' names during the Kanwar pilgrimages of the last 60 years, there was no harm in allowing the yatra this year without the enforcement of such directions. He added that the UP Government has admitted in their affidavit that the direction was causing discrimination. He read out the following statement from the affidavit : "The temporary nature of the directives ensures that they do not inflict any permanent discrimination or hardship on the food sellers, simultaneously ensuring maintaining the sentiments of Kanwariyas and their religious beliefs and practices".

"So they say there is discrimination, but it is not permanent," he submitted.

Deputy Advocate General of Uttarakhand, Jatinder Kumar Sethi, submitted that the law mandates the display of the owners' names and that the interim order was creating problems. He stated that this legal mandate was being enforced by the State all over during all festivals. If an unregistered vendor causes any mischief along the Kanwar Yatra route, it will lead to law and order problems, he submitted.

When the bench asked the Dy. AG to elaborate on what could be a "mischief", he cited an example of an unregistered vendor selling mangoes laced with sedatives to the pilgrims.

The bench also heard the brief submissions made by certain Kanwar pilgrims, who intervened in the matter to support the government's directions. The intervenor submitted that Kanwar pilgrims only take vegetarian food items prepared without garlic and onion. There are certain shops with confusing names, giving a false impression that they serve only vegetarian food causing problems to the pilgrims, he submitted. "There are shops with names like Saraswati Dhaba, Ma Durga Dhaba. We assume it is pure vegetarian. When we enter the shop, the owners and the employees are different, and non-vegetarian food items are served there. It is against my custom and usages," he submitted. It was in this context that the Muzaffarpur police issued the advisory to display the names "voluntarily", he submitted.

The bench clarified that it has not prevented anyone from voluntarily displaying the names of owners and staff and the stay was only against forcing anyone to do so.

After the order was dictated, Dy.AG of Uttarakhand urged the bench to clarify that the State can take action under the law requiring the display of owner names. However, the bench stated that the interim order will remain as it was.

The counsel appearing for the State of Madhya Pradesh denied a news report that the Ujjain Municipal Corporation has issued a similar directive.

Senior Advocates Chander Uday Singh and Huzefa Ahmadi also appeared for the petitioners.

On the last date of hearing, the Court issued notice to UP, Uttarakhand, Madhya Pradesh and Delhi on three petitions filed against the directives. It also stayed the impugned directives, saying that shops and eateries may be required to display the kind of food that they are selling to Kanwariyas. However, they must not be forced to display the names/identities of owners and employees deployed in the establishments.

Background

The Kanwar Yatra is an annual pilgrimage undertaken by Shiva devotees known as Kanwarias or "Bhole", during which they travel to key Hindu pilgrimage sites such as Haridwar, Gaumukh, and Gangotri in Uttarakhand and Ajgaibinath in Sultanganj, Bhagalpur, Bihar, to fetch holy water from the Ganges River.

On July 17, 2024, the Senior Superintendent of Police, Muzaffarnagar, issued a directive requiring all eateries along the Kanwar route to display the owners' names. This direction was extended statewide on July 19, 2024. Reportedly, the directive is now being rigorously enforced across all districts of Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand.

Against the said directive, three petitions seem to have been filed before the Supreme Court - (i) first, by NGO-Association for Protection of Civil Rights (APCR), (ii) second, by TMC MP Mahua Moitra, and (iii) third, by well-known political commentator and Delhi University academic Apoorvanand Jha and columnist Aakar Patel.

The petitioners argue inter-alia that the directives threaten a religious divide and violate the fundamental rights of citizens guaranteed under Articles 14, 15, 17, and 19 of the Indian Constitution. It is further claimed that they violate the right to privacy of owners and workers of eateries, exposing them to danger and making them targets.

Case Title: ASSOCIATION FOR PROTECTION OF CIVIL RIGHTS (APCR) Versus THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS., W.P.(C) No. 463/2024