Supreme Court Halts UP and Uttarakhand Ordering Eateries to Disclose Staff Information During Kanwar Yatra

The Supreme Court of India has intervened in a contentious matter, issuing a stay on the recent directives from the state governments of Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand. These orders mandated that eatery proprietors situated along the Kanwar Yatra route provide detailed disclosure of their identities and that of their employees.

In its interim decision, the Supreme Court asserted that food vendors should not be compelled to reveal the names of their owners and staff. The court scheduled a follow-up hearing for July 26 to further deliberate on the issue at hand.

The judiciary’s intervention comes as a result of challenges brought forth by various non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and specific political figures, including Mahua Moitra, a Member of Parliament from the Trinamool Congress (TMC). Moitra’s petition urged the court to halt the enforcement of these orders, expressing concern that such requirements could inflame communal tensions.

During the proceedings, the petitioners’ legal representatives communicated that the directives are problematic, leading to a division among communities by spotlighting minority identities. Senior advocate CU Singh, who represented one of the petitioners, argued that the majority of those impacted were vulnerable individuals, specifically small-scale vendors like vegetable and tea stall owners, who are now facing dire economic consequences as a result of this mandate.

Singh raised alarms over the potential for heightened hostility, suggesting that non-compliance with the orders could lead to punitive measures, including bulldozer actions against those who fail to comply.

The Supreme Court expressed its astonishment at the notion that devotees participating in the Kanwar Yatra might demand that their food be provided exclusively by owners of specific communal identities. The bench concluded that it would be suitable to issue a temporary injunction against the enforcement of the controversial directives.

The bench underscored that while food sellers could be obligated to display information regarding the types of food they offer, they should not be forced to disclose the identities of their owners or their staff members.

The situation escalated when the Muzaffarnagar police originally mandated that eateries along the Kanwar Yatra route reveal the names of their proprietors. Subsequently, the Uttar Pradesh government expanded this order across the entire state, with Uttarakhand—also governed by the Bharatiya Janata Party—emulating similar directives.

In the larger context, the municipal authorities in Ujjain instructed local shopkeepers to publicly display their names and mobile phone numbers outside their establishments. Ujjain’s Mayor, Mukesh Tatwal, commented on this move, stating that non-compliance could lead to fines of ₹2,000 for a first violation, escalating to ₹5,000 for repeat offenders, asserting that the intention was to promote safety and transparency rather than to target any particular community.

In contrast to these actions, the government of Madhya Pradesh made it clear that it had not issued any orders compelling shop owners in the state to display their names while the Kanwar Yatra occurs.

The spokesperson for the BJP, Jugal Kishore, clarified that the Supreme Court’s decision constitutes a temporary measure, assuring that the state will present its perspective during the upcoming court session.

In reaction to the Supreme Court’s ruling, TMC’s Mahua Moitra commended the judiciary, proclaiming, “Long live our Constitution. And may we always protect it,” through a post on social media platform X.

This situation continues to unfold as various stakeholders monitor the proceedings scheduled for later this month. The dialogue surrounding community integration and the rights of businesses along religious pilgrimage routes remains an intricate issue in contemporary Indian socio-political discourse.