All eateries must display names of owners: Yogi Adityanath
This came two months after the Supreme Court stayed enforcement of similar directives issued by police in Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand to eateries along the Kanwar Yatra route to display names of the owners.

Taking cognizance of incidents involving food adulteration, including spitting or mixing urine in eatables, Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath on Tuesday issued a series of directions, including mandatory display of name and address of operators, proprietors and managers at eateries across the state.
This came two months after the Supreme Court stayed enforcement of similar directives issued by police in Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand to eateries along the Kanwar Yatra route to display names of the owners.
“The names and addresses of the operator, proprietor, manager, and other relevant personnel should be prominently displayed at food establishments. In this context, necessary amendments should be made to the Food Safety and Standards Act to ensure compliance,” said a government statement issued after the Chief Minister held a high-level meeting on Tuesday.
Adityanath also directed installation of CCTV cameras at all food establishments such as dhabas, hotels and restaurants. “Surveillance should cover not only the areas where customers dine, but also other parts of the establishment. It is imperative that every operator ensures the security of the CCTV footage and makes it available to the police or local administration upon request,” the statement said.
The Chief Minister also ordered a state-wide verification campaign at the food establishments. “A state-wide intensive campaign should be conducted to verify all employees, including the operators of these establishments. This verification process must be completed swiftly by a joint team comprising the Food Safety and Drug Administration, Police, and Local Administration,” the statement said.
What the top court said
Staying name display orders of police in Uttarakhand and UP for the Kanwar route, the SC had on July 22 said the “competent authority” may issue such orders under the food safety Act, and the power cannot be “usurped” by police.
It said that in recent times, “incidents of adulterating food items like juice, dal, and roti with human waste, inedible, or dirty substances have been reported from various parts of the country”.
“These acts are atrocious, posing a serious threat to public health. Such malicious practices are completely unacceptable. To prevent such occurrences in Uttar Pradesh, concrete measures must be put in place to ensure food safety and protect the health of the common man,” the statement said.
The Chief Minister also directed that cleanliness must be maintained at all food centres. “It is essential to ensure that all personnel involved in preparing and serving food wear masks and gloves, with no room for negligence in these practices,” the statement said.
On July 22, staying the police orders in Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand on display of owners’ names at eateries on the Kanwar Yatra route, a bench of Justices Hrishikesh Roy and S V N Bhatti had said: “Until the returnable date… we deem it appropriate to pass interim order prohibiting the enforcement of the above directives. In other words, the food-sellers… may be required to display the kind of food they are serving to the kanwariyas but must not be forced to disclose the names/ identities of the owners or employees.”
“It is permissible for the authorities to ensure that the kanwariyas are served vegetarian food conforming to the standards of hygiene and conforming to their preferences… In furtherance of this, the competent authority may, perhaps, issue orders under The Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 or The Street Vendors Act, 2014, but the powers vested on the competent authority cannot be usurped by the police without any formal order supported by law,” the bench said.
“If the intention is to provide only vegetarian food to the Kanwariyas, the impugned directives requiring the food business operators to display the names of their owners and employees, is contended to be contrary to constitutional and legal norms prevalent in our country.”