New Delhi. A hearing was held in the Supreme Court on Monday against the Yogi Adityanath government’s decision to put nameplates on all shops during the Kanwar Yatra. Abhishek Manu Singhvi appeared in the Supreme Court on behalf of a petitioner. To stop the decision of the UP and Uttarakhand governments, Singhvi put forward many arguments ranging from law to the judge in the Supreme Court. In this case, after hearing the arguments of the petitioners, the Supreme Court has put an interim stay on the decision of the Yogi government and the Dhami government of Uttarakhand. This means that shopkeepers cannot be forced to write their names on their shops during the Kanwar Yatra.
Let us tell you that first of all, the Yogi government of UP had ordered to write the names of the owners and employees on all the restaurants and dhabas located on the Kanwar Yatra route. Shravan month is starting from today i.e. Monday. Devotees and devotees travel several kilometers carrying Kanwar to offer water to Bhole Shankar. During the same journey, they buy food items and other things from many shops and dhabas. The UP government was the first to issue an order to write the names of the owners on these shops so that devotees can buy goods from the shop of their choice. After that, the Uttarakhand government also issued a similar order.
When this matter reached the Supreme Court, Abhishek Manu Singhvi argued that this is not the job of the police… How can the police issue such broad instructions? Singhvi said that there are many pure vegetarian restaurants run by Hindus, but they may also have Muslim employees. Can anyone say that I should not go there and eat? Because those people have a hand in that food in some way or the other? The Supreme Court said that do the Kawadias think that they should get food from a selected shopkeeper? On this, Singhvi said that the Kawadias are not doing the journey for the first time and have been doing it earlier. The Supreme Court said that is anyone appearing from the other side (UP government)?
Supreme Court Justice Bhatti said that this is my personal experience. In Kerala, a vegetarian hotel is run by a Hindu and a vegetarian hotel is run by a Muslim. But I went to a Muslim hotel. It was clean. The standards of safety, standards and hygiene were of international level and that is why I went there. It is completely a matter of your choice. Singhvi argued that there are only 2 conditions in the Food Safety Act. Only calories and vegetarian/non-vegetarian food have to be displayed.
Supreme Court Justice Bhatti said that the license will also have to be displayed. Singhvi said that this is not the job of the police. How can the police issue such broad instructions? Advocate Huzaifa Ahmadi-A public notice has been issued with the seal of Muzaffarnagar Police. It is also on his Twitter handle. The petitioner said that it was implemented by the high authorities of Uttarakhand and Uttar Pradesh.
The petitioner said that the word voluntary used by Muzaffarnagar police can be taken in two ways. Voluntary and it has to be implemented. Huzaifa Ahmadi said that the result of this is that after this, employees of a particular community have been fired from their jobs. This has happened after the intervention of the police, such things have been said in press reports. The Supreme Court again asked whether anyone is appearing from the other side?
Tags: Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Supreme Court, Aditya Nath
FIRST PUBLISHED : July 22, 2024, 18:07 IST