Kanwar Yatra: Hotel owners must display licences & registration certificates, says Supreme Court

The Bench of Justice MM Sundresh and Justice NK Singh was hearing an application seeking directions to the States of Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand to withdraw all QR code mandates or any mechanisms that allegedly disclose owner identity and enable religious profiling.

Senior Advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi, and Huzefa Ahmadi appeared for different petitioners, including academic Apoorvanand Jha, while, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi appeared for the State of Uttar Pradesh.

Singhvi argued that forcing vendors to publicly display names of owners and employees amounted to unconstitutional identity-based discrimination. “There is anonymity of the marketplace. You are trying to ostracise establishments owned by minorities,” he submitted, calling the move a “direct assault” on Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21 and the basic structure doctrine.

“This sows the seeds of division. It’s not about what’s on the menu but who owns the shop,” Singhvi added, referring to QR codes that reveal ownership details. He contended the system effectively targets and marginalises businesses run by members of minority communities.

Ahmadi contended that the issue was being confused; while restrictions on serving non-vegetarian food during the Kanwar Yatra could be considered reasonable, identity disclosure was a separate and constitutionally suspect matter.

The Bench, however, steered clear of the communal framing.

When a counsel remarked that a dhaba with a Hindu name was being run by a Muslim and that this was the “problem,” Justice Sundresh bluntly responded: “Please don’t embarrass us with such submissions.”

To Singhvi’s arguments on identity-based consumer influence, Justice Sundresh remarked, “I’m agnostic. I have no problem. But my friend wouldn’t eat at a place that even touches garlic or onion. Consumer interest matters.”

Justice Sundresh highlighted the importance of transparency for consumers while still balancing the rights of business owners. “Consumer is the king,” he remarked, indicating that they have a right to know whether a hotel serves vegetarian food only during Shravan or throughout the year; and that such information could be drawn from licenses already required under law.

Rohatgi, appearing for Uttar Pradesh, defended the state’s actions, stating that regulations were based on central law. He clarified that the order for identity disclosure had been issued last year by local authorities amid incidents of violence. “We’re only implementing a central law applicable nationwide, not just during the Yatra,” he submitted.

Rohatgi also questioned the petitioners’ standing, stating, “This petition is by a professor, an MP from Calcutta, and an NGO. There are hundreds protesting on the streets, yet none of them have come to Court.”

Justice Sundresh dismissed the submission, “We are not getting into that.”

Conclusively, the Court passed ordered, “Since today is said to be the last day of the Yatra or it may end soon, we direct hotel owners to display licences and registration certificates as per law. We are not addressing other issues. Application closed.”

Accordingly, the IA filed by Apoorvanand Jha has been disposed of.

The Application sought directions to the states of Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand to immediately withdraw all QR code-based identification mandates or any other mechanisms that result in disclosure of owner identity or religious profiling of vendors along the Kanwar Yatra route.

Previously