The Gujarat High Court is hearing a challenge by six non-vegetarian restaurant owners against the Gujarat government’s permanent ban on the sale and storage of non-vegetarian food in specified areas around Somnath temple. The petitioners have alleged that the notification violates their constitutional rights to conduct a lawful trade and earn a livelihood, while the government has defended the restriction as necessary to protect pilgrims’ religious sentiments.
The ban applies to six designated areas, including a 500-metre radius around the Somnath temple. According to the government’s submissions, the restaurants and shops operated by the petitioners are located on major routes leading to the temple. Pilgrims visiting the shrine therefore encounter non-vegetarian food products while travelling towards the temple, the government has argued.
The petitioners’ advocate, Asrar Mansuri, submitted that the notification issued in August violates the fundamental right to practise a profession or carry on an occupation, trade or business under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. The petitioners have argued that authorities cannot prevent people from conducting a lawful business without reasonable grounds and have alleged that hotel owners are being repeatedly harassed by officials.
The case also raised questions about the conduct of local officials during the court proceedings. According to the petitioners, on October 7, when the matter was being heard for the first time, the Mamlatdar obtained signed undertakings from all six petitioners at a police outpost. The undertakings reportedly stated that the restaurant owners would conduct only vegetarian business in the future.
The High Court took serious note of the allegation and questioned the government on why the Mamlatdar obtained the restaurant owners’ signatures on the same day that the case was being heard. The issue places the focus not only on the scope of the food-sale restriction but also on how administrative enforcement is being carried out while the legality of the government notification is before the court.
The dispute brings together three separate administrative concerns: regulation of commercial activity around a major religious destination, protection of pilgrims’ stated religious sensitivities, and the rights of existing businesses operating in the affected areas. The government’s position is that the restriction is limited to specified locations around Somnath and is intended to ensure that pilgrims do not encounter food products that may offend their religious sentiments.
For the restaurant owners, the challenge centres on whether a permanent restriction on the sale and storage of non-vegetarian food can be imposed in the notified areas and whether such a measure unlawfully limits their trade and livelihood. The court’s consideration of the alleged undertakings adds a procedural dimension to the case, since the signatures were reportedly obtained while the legal challenge was already under hearing.
The Gujarat High Court is scheduled to hear the matter further on October 16. The next proceedings are expected to address the government’s justification for the notification and the circumstances in which the undertakings were obtained from the six restaurant owners.
