A group of Supreme Court advocates Today (Oct 3) wrote to the SCBA and SCOARA expressing their objection to the Supreme Court canteen’s decision to stop serving non-vegetarian food and dishes containing onion or garlic during Navratri. The advocates stated that this move is unprecedented and raised concerns about its implications.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: A group of Supreme Court advocates wrote to the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) and the Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association (SCOARA) expressing their objection to the Supreme Court canteen’s decision to stop serving non-vegetarian food and dishes containing onion or garlic during the Navratri festival.
The advocates noted that while they respect those observing Navratri, the canteen’s decision to exclusively serve Navratri-compliant food is “unprecedented” and raised concerns about the broader implications of such a move. They emphasized the importance of catering to all dietary preferences and warned that this decision could set a problematic precedent for the future.
Several members of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) raised concerns regarding the recent decision by the Supreme Court canteen to exclusively serve Navratri-compliant food. This decision, which includes the exclusion of non-vegetarian items and dishes containing onion and garlic, sparked conversations about pluralism and inclusivity within the Supreme Court premises.
In a formal letter addressed to the President of the SCBA, a group of lawyers voiced their objections regarding the canteen’s menu restrictions during the ongoing Navratri festival, which began on October 3. The lawyers expressed that while they respect the traditions of those observing Navratri, imposing such restrictions on everyone sets an “unprecedented” and potentially problematic standard for future practices.
The Concern Raised
The letter begins by acknowledging that lawyers practicing at the Supreme Court have traditionally observed Navratri without any interference. Many lawyers bring their special Navratri meals from home for the entire nine days of the festival without facing any issues. This practice has always been upheld harmoniously in the Court’s canteen.
However, this year marks the first time that the Supreme Court canteen has officially announced that it will exclusively serve Navratri-compliant food for the duration of the festival.
The letter emphasizes:
“For the first time this year the Supreme Court canteen has announced that it will only serve Navratra food. This is not only unprecedented and will also set a very wrong precedent for the future.”
Respect for Pluralism
While the lawyers clarify that they have “no objection” to Navratri-compliant food being available, they strongly urge that such options should not be imposed on everyone. They propose that in addition to the Navratri meals for those observing the festival, the canteen should continue to offer its regular menu for others who do not observe these dietary restrictions.
“While we have no objection or on the contrary be happy if the canteen, in addition to its normal menu, also provide the navratra food to those observing it, it should not be imposed on others,”
-the letter stated.
The lawyers further argue that the canteen’s diverse menu caters to a wide range of dietary preferences, including non-vegetarian dishes and meals containing onion and garlic, and that removing these options to accommodate the wishes of a few is inconsistent with the spirit of pluralism and inclusivity that should be maintained.
The letter points out:
“The Supreme Court canteen caters to all. We are all dependent on it. Non-serving of non-vegetarian or food with onion-garlic to cater to the wishes of a few is not in keeping with our pluralist traditions and would result in lack of respect for each other.”
Potential Consequences of the Decision
The lawyers warn that allowing such exclusions may pave the way for further restrictions in the future. Once a precedent is set, it may “open the floodgates” for other impositions in the name of religious or cultural practices.
They write:
“Once this is allowed, it will open the floodgates to a lot of other impositions as well.”
A Request for Inclusivity
In concluding their appeal, the lawyers requested that the canteen reinstate its regular menu and maintain inclusivity while still providing Navratri-compliant food for those who wish to observe the festival. This would ensure that the dietary preferences of all individuals are respected.
They concluded by stating,
“We would therefore request you to kindly ask the canteen to provide its normal menu. At the same time, we will be glad if they can provide the navratra menu to those observing it.”
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Navratri
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
