New Delhi: The Supreme Court, on Tuesday, refused to stay the Uttar Pradesh government’s order mandating restaurants along the Kanwar Yatra route to display QR codes with names of owners. The Court, however, directed the restaurant owners to display their licenses and registration certificates as required under the Food Safety and Standards Act (FSSA) and posted the matter for hearing after two weeks for compliance.
The court passed the order on petitions filed by Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra and academician Apoorvanand Jha, challenging the UP government’s order, saying it promoted religious profiling.
Moitra and Jha said that the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) regulations do not mandate QR coding. They cited a July 2024 Supreme Court order staying a similar Uttar Pradesh Police direction asking restaurant owners to display their names and those of their employees. The court had directed that no owner will be forced to display this information. Moitra and Jha’s pleas alleged that the fresh order was an attempt to “circumvent” the stay by introducing QR code requirements.
A bench of Justices M M Sundresh and Justice N Kotiswar Singh said they will at this stage only pass an order that all owners shall comply with the mandate of displaying the license and registration certificates as required statutorily.
When senior advocate Huzefa Ahmadi, appearing for one of the petitioners, sought a clarification on whether the names of owners and those of employees need not be displayed on QR code, the bench said: “All these issues are left open. We are not going into this issue. You may challenge it before the High Court. In any case, it is infructuous. We are informed that today [Tuesday] is the last day of the Yatra, and in any case, it is likely to end…”
Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi objected to the fresh order, saying it was all about identity politics. “This is the most divisive policy to ostracise a minority community during this Yatra, which alienates them. It sows the seeds of identity division, is a direct assault on secularism and is per se unconstitutional, violating right to equality, right to practice profession and right to life…”
He pointed out that all shops along the Kanwar route strictly sell vegetarian food during this time of the year. “You can boycott a food based on the menu, not on the identity of the owner. Before issuing this order, the state ought to have sought permission from court for modification of the stay,” Singhvi said.
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing the state government, said the QR code order has been issued under the Food Safety and Standards Act. He said that the direction last year from the police was stayed, and it was left open for the state to issue directions for maintaining food standards and quality.
Rohatgi said not a single affected owner had approached the court. He questioned the right of the petitioners to challenge the state’s direction. “These devotees are highly sentimental. They would not like to have food from a shop that used to serve non-vegetarian food until a month ago, using the same utensils. Last year, there was a law and order problem, and some shops were ransacked. We are simply applying the mandate under the Food Safety Regulations that require the display of the hotel’s name and photo identity.”
The bench said the sentiments of devotees should not be affected. “At the same time, the livelihood of shop owners should not be affected too. The court has to strike a balance.” The court said consumers need to be given the choice to decide whether they would prefer to eat from a pure vegetarian hotel or one that serves vegetarian food during this period of the year. “We are concerned with consumers. It must be his choice. Ultimately, the consumer is the king. We need to prioritise the interest of consumers,” the bench said.
The petitioners argued that the license displayed in shops provides for this information, whether a shop sells vegetarian or a mix of both. The court remarked, “It depends on a person’s conscience…If you are a vegetarian throughout the year without any change, then the question of indicating name will not arise. But during the Yatra, if someone stops at a hotel selling non-vegetarian food, that is now selling vegetarian food, that can be an issue for consumers. They should know. That flexibility should be given to consumers.”
