Supreme Court Issues Notice On PIL To Display Names & Contact Details Of Owners At Entrances Of All Shops
The Supreme Court today issued notice to the respondents on a public interest litigation seeking mandatory disclosure of shop owner/seller details as part of consumer's 'right to know' about products they purchase.
The Union Government, all State Governments, and the Law Commission of India are respondents in the case.
A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta passed the order, after hearing Advocate Eklavya Dwivedi on behalf of petitioner-Advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay.
The PIL seeks the following reliefs:
- declaration that every consumer has 'right to know' not only about the quality, quantity, potency, purity, standard, manufacturing date, expiry date and BIS/FSSAI certification of goods/products, but also details of the Distributor, Dealer, Trader, Seller and Shop Owner, so as to seek redressal against unfair restrictive trade practices and unscrupulous exploitation in spirit of provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019;
- direction to the Centre and States to ensure that every Distributor, Dealer, Trader, Seller and Shop Owner displays details of Registration including Name, address, phone number and number of employees at the entry gate in bold letters on a display board visible to an ordinary person of ordinary prudence.
It may be recalled that last year, at the time of Kanwar Yatra, the Supreme Court passed an interim order, holding that shop owners/sellers can't be forced to disclose their identities.
Lately, an application was filed in the Supreme Court against recent directives issued by the Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand Governments to food sellers along the Kanwar Yatra route to display QR code stickers on their banners which would enable the pilgrims to access the details of the owners. It stated that although eateries are legally obliged to obtain licenses and display them, they need to be displayed only inside the premises. The government mandate to display the names and identities of the owners on the billboards outside is an overstep. An apprehension was voiced that the Government's directions will cause mob violence, especially against vendors belonging to minority communities.
Case Title: ASHWINI KUMAR UPADHYAY Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS., W.P.(C) No. 667/2025