Skyhilton Restaurant Thru. Authorized Person Manager Sanjay Yadav and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Food Safety and Durg Administration Lko. and 6 Ors.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

WRIT - C No. - 1096 of 2026

¶3

Skyhilton Restaurant Thru. Authorized Person Manager Sanjay Yadav And Another

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Food Safety And Durg Administration Lko. And 6 Ors.

¶7

aey n urg mnsra	on o. n	rs. .....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Ishan Singh, Ahmad	Bhasin, Anurag Singh, Aryan Chandan Verma, Syed Aftab , Tauheed
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C.,	Shailendra Singh Chauhan

¶8

Court No. - 5

¶9

HON'BLE ALOK MATHUR, J. HON'BLE DIVESH CHANDRA SAMANT, J.

¶10

Heard Sri Ishan Bhasin on behalf of petitioners and learned counsel for the opposite parties.

¶11

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are registered under the name of "SKYHILTON RESTAURANT" (A UNIT OF JB CLUB) and has a licence for operating Food Services-Restaurants. It has further been stated that they have been issued licence by the Department of Food Safety and Drug Administration and the grievance raising the present petition is with regard to the petitioners not being permitted to run a Hukkah Bar in the aforesaid premises. It has further been submitted that this aspect of the matter was duly considered in PIL No.716 of 2020 which was disposed of by directing the persons affected to apply to the statutory authority in accordance with law for grant of a Hukkah Bar. It has further been submitted that the petitioners have moved an application for grant of licence on 20.08.2025 but till date no such licence has been granted to the petitioners and it is stated that they are feeling threatened that the police may restrain the petitioners and their customers from running the Hukkah Bar and with a prayer to direct the State respondents to permit the petitioners to run and operate a Hukkah Bar in petitioners establishment.

¶12

When a categorical query has been made to the petitioners as to whether

¶13

WRIC No. 1096 of 2026

¶14

2

¶15

they have obtained any specific licence for running a Hukkah Bar, we have been informed that no such licence has been issued to the petitioners so far.

¶16

Accordingly, prima-facie this Court is of the considered view that the petitioners do not have a fundamental right to run a Hukkah Bar, such an activity falls under the realm of res extra commercium as stated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.N. Krishna Lal versus Govt. of Kerala, 1995 Supp (2) SCC 187 : SCC (Cri) 466 at page 206 (para 24). Paragraph 24 reads as under:-

¶17

24. The reisen di-etre of the State being the welfare of the members of the society, the whole purpose of the creation of the State would be to maintain order, health and morality by suitable legislation and proper administration. The State has the power to prohibit trade or business which are illegal, immoral or injurious to the health and welfare of the people. No one has the right to carry on any trade or occupation or business which is inherently vicious and pernicious and is condemned by all civilised societies. Equally no one could claim entitlement to carry on any trade or business or any activities which are criminal and immoral or in any articles of goods which are obnoxious and injurious to the safety and health of general public. There is no inherent right in crime. Prohibition of trade or business of noxious or dangerous substance or goods, by law is in the interest of social welfare.

¶18

Only if proper licence is obtained by the petitioners, they can be permitted to run a Hukkah Bar subsequently after complying with the terms and conditions of such a licence.

¶19

It has been informed that a bunch of matters are already pending consideration, the leading petition being Writ-C No. 10713 of 2023.

¶20

Accordingly, for the aforesaid facts we are not persuaded to pass any interim order with regard to the petitioners.

¶21

List and connect along-with Writ-C No.10713 of 2023.

¶22

February 23, 2026 I.A. Siddiqui

¶23

(Divesh Chandra Samant,J.) (Alok Mathur,J.)

¶24

Digitally signed by :- IMRAN AHMAD SIDDIQUI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Skyhilton Restaurant Thru. Authorized Person Manager Sanjay Yadav and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Food Safety and Durg Administration Lko. and 6 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Skyhilton Restaurant Thru. Authorized Person Manager Sanjay Yadav and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Food Safety and Durg Administration Lko. and 6 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prin. Commissioner of Income Tax- I Lucknow vs M/S U.P. State Sugar Corporation Ltd. Lucknow Thru Authorised Person

Uttar Pradesh State Industrial Dvelopment Authority, Lucknow Thru Senior Manager vs M/S Ahluwalia Construction Group New Delhi Thru Its Proprietor

Mrs. Neelam Soni and 3 Others vs U.O.I. Thru. Secy. Ministry of Finance New Delhi and 4 Others

Sushil Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Geology and Mining Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

M/S Kriti Akriti Thru. Proprietor Shesh Ram Jaiswal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Nagar Vikas Lko and 2 Others

Smt. Rita Devi and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Lko. and 5 Others