The Supreme Court has temporarily halted a controversial order from the Uttar Pradesh government that required eateries along the Kanwar Yatra route to display the names of their owners and employees “to avoid confusion.”
The opposition criticised this order, with AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi arguing that it was aimed at preventing pilgrims from buying from Muslim-owned shops. He compared the move to Apartheid in South Africa and the boycotting of Jewish businesses in Nazi Germany. The stay is in effect until Friday.
The court has paused the UP government order and highlighted the implications of the directives, issuing notices to the governments of UP, Uttarakhand, and Madhya Pradesh. Importantly, the court also pointed out the threat of police action if the directives are not followed: “the threat of police action in the event of non-adherence to the directives…”.
“…until the returnable date, we deem it appropriate to pass an interim order prohibiting enforcement of the directive. Food sellers must not be forced to display the names of owners and staff,” the court ordered.
The bench of Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice SVN Bhatti also made some strong observations this afternoon, noting that “it is permissible for authorities to ensure kanwariyas (pilgrims) are served vegetarian food conforming to their preferences and maintaining hygienic standards.”.
“Compelling all proprietors to display names and addresses, as well as those of their staff, can hardly achieve the intended objective.” Justice Roy reasoned, also adding, “…without the support of provisions, if the directive is permitted to be enforced… it will infringe the secular character of the Republic of India.”
“The Idea of this Directive is Exclusion by Identity”
Food, and who cooks and serves at restaurants, were at the core of arguments this morning.
“You go to a restaurant depending on the menu, not who is serving. The idea behind this directive is exclusion by identity. This is not the Republic of India we envisaged in the Constitution,” senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for the petitioners, said forcefully.
“There are a lot of ‘pure vegetarian’ restaurants run by Hindus… but they may have Muslim employees. Can I say I won’t eat there? Because food is somehow ‘touched’ by them?”
“No Law Gives the Police the Power to Do This”
The petitioners also flagged a “worrying situation where police are taking it upon themselves to create a divide… minorities would be identified and subject to boycott…” The reference was to the enforcement of what the authorities had said was a directive to be followed “voluntarily.”.
“It has never been done before and has no statutory backing. No law gives the police the power to do this. The directive is for every haath-gaadi (hand-cart), tea-stall… giving names of owners and employees does not serve any purpose.” Mr. Singhvi said, hitting out at the “camouflaged order.”.
The petitioners argued against the authorities’ claim that the Kanwar Yatra directive is voluntary. They pointed out that UP Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath publicly stated that the directive must be enforced. They also noted that Uttarakhand’s Chief Minister, Pushkar Singh Dhami, made a similar statement.
“This is being endorsed at the highest level in both UP and Uttarakhand… the effect is that employees of certain communities have been fired after this,” the petitioners argued.
