Owner name on eateries: Himachal denies any such order as angry Congress high command sends missive

On Thursday, a spokesperson of the Himachal government said that a committee had been formed to frame a policy on street vendors, and was yet to take a decision. “So far, the state government has not made any decision regarding the mandatory display of nameplates or any other form of identification by vendors at their stalls,” the statement said.

Sources said this followed a message by an upset Congress central leadership to Chief Minister Sukhvinder Singh Sukhu and Vikramaditya, asking them to desist from such “divisive” moves. AICC in-charge of Himachal Pradesh Rajeev Shukla spoke to both the leaders and conveyed the leadership’s displeasure, sources said.

Congress minority wing chief and Rajya Sabha MP Imran Pratapgarhi reportedly brought the issue to Rahul Gandhi’s notice when he met him Thursday.

During the Kanwar Yatra, when the district authorities in Muzaffarnagar had issued a notice directing hotels, eateries and shops along the route of the procession to display the names of their owners and employees, the Congress had hit out at the UP government led by Yogi Adityanath.

With many Congress leaders expressing surprise over Vikramaditya’s statement, Shukla issued a statement saying there was no question of the Himachal government taking any decision on the lines of UP. “I have spoken to both the Chief Minister and Vikramaditya Singh. The fact of the matter is that a committee had been formed (for drafting a street vendors’ policy). The idea is to allocate a designated place for street vendors and give them licences… regulate them so that they are not harassed… There is no decision that they have to display their names,” Shukla said.

He added: “There is nothing like the Yogi pattern… There everything is politicised and communalised. I want to make it clear that there is no direction (on display of names) from the Government or the Chief Minister.”

While Shukla also said the leadership had not “reprimanded” either Sukhu or Vikramaditya, sources said the leadership had asked Shukla to convey its strong displeasure. “It shows weak leadership on the part of Sukhu,” a senior leader said.

But Vikramaditya, who had openly rebelled over Sukhu’s selection as CM and continues to take positions contrary to the Congress, such as on the Ram Temple issue, seemed to stand by his remarks. Speaking to The Indian Express on the phone from Delhi, he said: “Whatever I said pertaining to the display of IDs of owners at eateries and food stalls is based on certain guidelines issued by the apex court and some high courts.”

Admitting that the committee discussing a policy for street vendors was yet to come out with a report, Vikramaditya added that he had made his comments as Urban Development Minister and not as a member of the panel.

CWC member and Lok Sabha MP Shashi Tharoor said any such move that invites “customers to discriminate on the basis of the identity of the vendor rather than the quality of their products” was dismaying. “I can understand the requirement to display a vending licence, but that could be in the name of a company or establishment, not necessarily an individual. And where does it stop? If a vendor from one community employs an assistant from another, can he be accused of misleading the customers by only posting his own name and not that of his staff?” Tharoor said.

He added: “At some point the courts may need to weigh in on whether the Right to Privacy proclaimed in the Puttaswamy judgment isn’t violated by such requirements to advertise your identity.”

Senior leader and former Chhattisgarh Deputy CM T S Singh Deo said: “There is no necessity for (such a move). Regular shops are governed by the Shops and Establishment Act. So every fixed place of business has to be registered with the local body. All your credentials are already there. They also give you a certificate which has to be displayed prominently… So why do you need to put the name of a person?… I don’t understand.”

Asked whether the decision was communal in nature, Singh Deo said: “Of course it is. It will certainly appear to be communal. It is very silly and shortsighted.” He regretted that such things were happening 77 years after Independence.

Congress Lok Sabha MP Karti Chidambaram echoed his views, saying: “People who are buying food have the right to know whether they are buying from a licensed vendor or not. So the display of the licence number is fair. Other than that, any personal information is totally unnecessary… Who is the name and face behind each licence can be verified by the authorities as they have all the information.”

On Wednesday, while calling the “decision” seeking display of IDs of owners of eateries as “state-centric… for the well-being of the people of the state”, Vikramaditya had referred to the recent incidents of tension in Himachal over “outsiders”. “There was unrest in our state the last few days… The display of identity cards will be mandatory for all vendors – be it Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, Christian or from any other community… Recent unrest was linked to the absence of a strong vending policy,” he told The Indian Express.

Senior BJP leader and former CM Jai Ram Thakur said the whole sequence of events was a mockery of the system. “If the state government is distancing itself from the statement of its sitting Cabinet minister, then something is seriously wrong within the government.”

Pointing to how Cabinet minister Anirudh Singh had changed his stand on the mosque row after raising doubts over its construction, within days, Thakur said, “All is not well with the Congress government in the state.”