The High Court of Karnataka on Monday directed the State government not to suspend the trade licence and seal the premises of private establishments for not changing the display to 60% in Kannada on the upper half of nameboard, if the date for implementing the amended Section 17(6) of the Kannada Language Comprehensive Development Act, 2022, is notified in the official gazette.
However, the court restrained the government and its agencies from taking any precipitative action against private establishments for not complying with the amended law, if the government has not notified the date for implementation of the Act in the official gazette.
Justice M. Nagaprasanna passed the interim order on a joint petition by the Retailers Association of India, Mumbai, Titan Company Ltd., PVR INOX Ltd., Aravind Lifestyles Brand Ltd., Infinite Retail Ltd., Aditya Birla Fashion and Retail Ltd., H and M Hennes and Mauriz Retail Ltd., and Hardcastle Restaurants Pvt. Ltd.
No provision in law
Though the court refused to stay the operation of the amended law, the court noted that the Act has provision for imposing only penalty, ranging from ₹5,000 for not displaying the nameboards in Kannada as specified, but the law does not empower the government or its agencies to suspend the trade licence or seal the business premises for violation.
Earlier, the petitioners’ advocate Manu Kulkarni pointed out that the circular issued by the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) empowers the officials to suspend the trade licence and seal the business premises contrary to the Section 23 of the Act, which prescribe only fine as penalty for violation.
The amended Act was notified in the gazette this February 26 on obtaining assent from the Governor on February 25, and Section 1 (2) of the amended Act states that “it shall come into force on such date as the State government may by notification in the Official Gazette appoint”. But the government is yet to issue official gazette notification as per Section 1(2) announcing the date from which the amendment will come into force, the advocate contended.
As the petitioners pointed out a lack of clarity on nameboards, the Advocate General assured the court that all the retailers and the business undertakings would be given complete clarity as and when any clarifications are sought for.
Contention of petitioners
It has been contended in the petition that Section 17(6) is a violation of Article 345 of the Constitution, which does not permit imposition of language on private parties for the purposes and functions that are not official functions of the State.
The imposition of 60% Kannada display on the upper half of nameboards is also violative of commercial speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, besides contrary to the rights conferred to the petitioners under the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
Also, the petitioners have pointed out that the amended law compels them to expend huge amounts, time, and effort to introduce the changed nameboards resulting in wasted expenditure, which is unreasonable and unjustified.
Published - March 18, 2024 08:34 pm IST
