July 14, 2025

National

SC to hear plea against QR code directive for eateries on Kanwar Yatra route

Kaumimarg Bureau / IANS | July 14, 2025 06:46 PM

New Delhi, July 14 (IANS) The Supreme Court is slated to hear on Tuesday a plea against the directive mandating all food establishments along the Kanwar Yatra route to display a QR code that allows pilgrims to access “ownership details”.

As per the apex court’s computerised case status, a Bench of Justices MM Sundresh and N Kotiswar Singh will take up the matter for hearing on July 15. The plea filed by academician Apoorvanand Jha and others contended that the display of QR codes on all eateries along the Kanwar Yatra route, which reveal the names and identities of the owners, is a breach of privacy rights, and has its discriminatory and stigmatising effect.

It said that such “discriminatory profiling” had previously been upheld by the top court on the ground that the display of personal identity was neither backed by law nor necessary for the purpose of public order or food safety compliance.

In July last year, the Supreme Court had stayed the operation of controversial directives issued by the Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand governments requiring all eateries and dhabas along the Kanwar Yatra route to display the names of owners and workers.

Issuing notice on petitions challenging the “nameplate” directives, a Bench headed by Justices Hrishikesh Roy (now retired) had remarked that the devotees may be served with food of their choice, maintaining standard hygiene. As per the plea, despite the above order, the state of Uttar Pradesh and other authorities are circumventing the interim stay order of the apex court by reintroducing the same directive this time in the form of display of QR codes.

It referred to a press note issued by the Chief Minister's office on June 25, which “reflects renewed administrative support for name displays” and expressly calls for "shopkeeper names to be clearly displayed" during the Yatra.

The plea contended that the state action, neither authorised by statute nor necessary for a legitimate purpose, is wholly disproportionate in its discriminatory and stigmatising effect.

Have something to say? Post your comment