‘Consumer is king': Supreme Court says eateries along Kanwar Yatra route must display licence, registration
A bench of Justices M M Sundresh and N K Singh underlined that 'consumer is the king' and should be given a choice to know what food a restaurant serves to make an informed choice.
The court was hearing an interlocutory application which challenged the direction to food sellers along the Kanwar Yatra route to display QR code stickers which, on scanning, would reveal ownership details of the eatery and other legal compliance.
The bench said it was not going into the legal challenge. 'We are told that today is the last day of the yatra. In any case, it is likely to come to an end in the near future. Therefore, at this stage, we would only pass an order that all the respective hotel owners shall comply with the mandate of displaying the licence and the registration certificate as per the statutory requirements. We make it clear that we are not going into the other issues argued. The application is closed,' the order said.
Pointing out that it was only trying to balance the sentiments of the pilgrims with the rights of the hoteliers, Justice Sundresh remarked during the hearing that 'if a hotel is running as a vegetarian hotel all through, then the question of indicating names and other things will not arise. But if only for the purpose of yatra, somebody stops serving non-veg and starts selling veg, the consumer should know.'
'To that extent, consumers should have that flexibility. If one hotel was earlier serving non-veg, and for the purpose of better business they serve only veg during the yatra, that will be an issue for the consideration of the consumer. The choice is of the consumer,' Justice Sundresh observed.
'Breach of privacy rights,' says plea
The application cited news reports that the state administration had issued a directive making it mandatory for the eateries to display the QR codes. It also referred to a 'press note dated 25.06.2024 issued by the Chief Minister of UP' and said 'it expressly calls for shopkeeper names to be clearly displayed during the yatra'.
The application said that similar directives to display the names of owners outside the shops along the Kanwar Yatra route were also issued last year, but were stayed by the Supreme Court. The fresh directive, it said, 'couched under the garb of 'lawful license requirements' is a breach of privacy rights'.
Appearing for the applicants, Senior Advocate A M Singhvi said authorities should have sought the modification of last year's court order before issuing the QR code directives. Terming it an attempt to further 'identity politics', Singhvi said, 'This is the most divisive initiative, to ostracise people during the yatra, as if these people are untouchables.'
Justice Sundresh said people have different food choices and may want to know if a place serves vegetarian or non-vegetarian food. 'I am basically agnostic. I have no problem at all. But there are some who will not even touch certain foods,' he remarked.
'Regulations framed under central law'
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the state of Uttar Pradesh, said the directions were only in furtherance of a central law and regulations of the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI).
'These regulations are framed under a central law. It is not the state of UP. Last year, we had a law and order situation where the kanwariyas were ransacking a dhaba because of these kinds of issues. That is why the police authority issued that order. Last year, an ad interim order was passed without hearing us. I am only following a central law that is applicable to the entire country and not just for Kanwar Yatra,' he said, adding that the licensing rules mandate photo identity card as well.
Senior Advocate Huzefa Ahmadi, also appearing for the applicants, said the customer's choice should be limited to what an eatery is selling at present and not extend to what it sells during the rest of the year.
Justice Sundresh said such submissions come from an utter ignorance of the consumer law under which the consumer is the king.
After the order was dictated, Ahmadi urged the court to clarify that 'the name of the owner and the QR code need not be disclosed. It has no backing in the law. Religious identity is sought to be exposed.'
But the court said, 'We have said that we are not going into it. If you want to challenge it, go before the high court.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
23 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Karnataka High Court criticises conduct of officials of Nirmithi Kendra in denying information under RTI Act
The High Court of Karnataka has criticised the conduct of officials of the Nirmithi Kendra in attempting to suppress transparency by claiming that the Right to Information (RTI) Act is not applicable to the kendra, even though it is sponsored and controlled by the State government through the Rural Development and Panchayat Raj (RDPR) Department. The court has also imposed a cost of ₹50,000 on the Nirmithi Kendra, Chitradurga, for denying information under the RTI Act by claiming that it is not a public authority but a private society. Justice Suraj Govindaraj passed the order, while dismissing a petition filed by the project director of Nirmithi Kendra, Chitradurga, who had questioned the State Information Commission's 2017 direction for providing information sought by some persons under the RTI Act. The court noted that the government had set up Nirmithi Kendras for developing low-cost technology alternatives for rural housing, and its control and supervision is under many top officials of the zilla panchayats and the district administrations belonging to the cadre of the Indian Administrative Service and the Karnataka Administrative Service, Besides, these kendras are being funded by HUDCO, which is a government entity, and contracts are given to the kendra by the State government, and there is a preference for these kendras to carry out works of the government, the court pointed out. A perusal of Section 2(h) of the RTI Act would indicate that it is not only funding, but also control, which would have to be considered to determine whether it is a public authority or not, the court said, while pointing out that not only the funding for these kendras is provided by the government, but the works carried out by them are also considered government's works. 'The attempt made by the officers of Nirmithi Kendra to suppress such transparency leaves much to be desired and does not inspire confidence. By way of such conduct, the Nirmithi Kendra, Chitradurga, has successfully avoided disclosure of information and details,' the court said, while declaring that Nirmithi Kendras as public authorities under the provisions of the RTI Act.
Mint
38 minutes ago
- Mint
Yogendra Yadav appears in Supreme Court with 2 voters declared dead in Bihar SIR, ‘drama,' says Election Commission
Political activist Yogendra Yadav on Tuesday brought to the Supreme Court two people who have been declared dead in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the electoral roll in poll-bound Bihar. Yadav, who addressed the Bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi in person, said that the names of these two people do not appear in the electoral rolls because they have been declared dead. "Please see them. These are declared as dead. They don't appear. But they are them," Yadav told the Court during the hearing of a batch of petitions challenging the Bihar SIR, legal news website Bar and Bench reported. Yadav is one of the petitioners in the case. Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for the Election Commission of India, termed the submission a "drama". Justice Bagchi said that this may have been an inadvertent error. "May have been an inadvertent error. Can be corrected. But your points are well taken," the judge said. Yadav, however, said that the SIR, by design, was leading to mass exclusion. "Vast exclusion has already is much more than 65 lakhs. This is not a failure of implementation of SIR, but because of the fact that wherever you implement SIR, the result will be the same," Yadav said. Yadav also said that people have never been asked to submit their forms in a revision exercise in the country's history. "If it was done in 2003, the other side should point it out," he said, adding that the SIR had not led to any additions. This was an exercise in intensive deletion, he claimed. "What was special in 2003 was that SIR was done apart from the word 'intensive' being used. This is the first exercise in the history of the country where revision has taken place with zero additions. Zero additions." Yadav called the entire process "dreadful" and said that the SIR was the largest exercise of disenfranchisement. "We also have confirmation that women have deleted more than men. 31 lakh women have been deleted...25 lakh men have been deleted," he added. Yadav also pointed to two people within the courtroom who were allegedly declared dead by the electoral authorities. "The figure is bound to cross 1 crore. This is not an issue of revision. Please see them. These are declared as dead. They don't appear. But they are them," he said. The Supreme Court, during the hearing, called the special intensive revision (SIR) row in poll-bound Bihar "largely a trust deficit issue' as the Election Commission of India (ECI) claimed roughly 6.5 crore people of the total 7.9 crore voting population didn't have to file any documents for them or their parents featured in the 2003 electoral roll. During the hearing, a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi remarked that it "largely appears to be a case of trust deficit, nothing else' as it questioned the petitioners challenging the Election Commission's 24 June decision to conduct the SIR on the ground that it would disenfranchise one crore voters. "If out of 7.9 crore voters, 7.24 crore voters responded to the SIR, it demolishesthe theory of one crore voters missing or disenfranchised," the bench told senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for petitioner and RJD Member of Parliament Manoj Jha. These are declared as dead. They don't appear. But they are them. Sibal, during the hearing, said that while in one constituency, contrary to the poll panel's claims, 12 people declared dead were found alive, in another instance, alive persons were declared dead. At the end of today's hearing, Justice Kant thanked Yadav for his assistance and 'analysis'. The hearing will continue on Wednesday. (With inputs from LiveLaw, Bar and Bench)
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
an hour ago
- Business Standard
SC restrains Assam Police from taking coercive action against Varadarajan
The Supreme Court on Tuesday restrained Assam Police from taking any coercive action against senior journalist Siddharth Varadarajan in connection with an FIR lodged against him over an article on Operation Sindoor. A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi issued notice on the PIL filed by the Foundation for Independent Journalism, which runs the web portal 'The Wire', challenging the constitutional validity of Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). Section 152 of the BNS deals with the "act endangering sovereignty, unity and integrity of India". "Whoever, purposely or knowingly, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or by electronic communication or by use of financial means, or otherwise, excites or attempts to excite, secession or armed rebellion or subversive activities, or encourages feelings of separatist activities or endangers sovereignty or unity and integrity of India; or indulges in or commits any such act shall be punished with imprisonment for life or with imprisonment which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine," it reads. The top court asked the members of the foundation and Varadarajan to cooperate with the investigation into the matter. The bench tagged the matter with a similar pending plea in which notice was issued on August 8. The FIR against Varadarajan was registered after an article was published in 'The Wire' on Operation Sindoor, under which India targeted terror infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir in May in retaliation for the April 22 Pahalgam attack. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
