A licensed fish and meat trader operating within the municipal limits of Amritsar has approached the Punjab and Haryana High Court challenging the Punjab Government’s notification declaring the Walled City of Amritsar a “Holy City” and the consequential restrictions imposed on the sale and trade of fish, meat and raw meat products in the area.
Kuldeep Fish Company, which claims to have been carrying on business for several years under a valid licence issued by the Municipal Corporation, Amritsar, has questioned the notification dated December 15, 2025, along with subsequent prohibitory orders, communications and directions restricting the sale, storage, use, display and trade of fish, meat and raw meat products within the Walled City limits.
The petitioner has contended that the impugned action has effectively resulted in a complete prohibition on an otherwise lawful and licensed trade without statutory authority, a rehabilitation policy, a relocation mechanism or a reasonable transition period.
It has been submitted that the firm has regularly deposited the requisite licence fee and municipal charges and was operating lawfully under a valid municipal licence. Despite this, its business premises were allegedly sealed and coercive action initiated without furnishing any statutory order or authority authorising such action.
The petition raises constitutional questions relating to the limits of executive power and invokes the fundamental right to carry on trade and business under Article 19(1)(g), the right to livelihood under Article 21 and the guarantee of equality under Article 14. It has been argued that any restriction on fundamental rights must have clear statutory backing and satisfy the tests of reasonableness and proportionality.
The petitioner has further contended that the expressions “Holy City” and “Walled City” have not been defined under any statute, rule or regulation and that executive notifications, by themselves, cannot create enforceable civil disabilities or impose blanket prohibitions on lawful commercial activities.
It has also been alleged that the impugned measures selectively target traders operating within the notified area without any intelligible differentia or rational basis.
Besides seeking quashing of the impugned notification and consequential actions, the petitioner has sought directions permitting it and similarly situated traders to continue their lawful business activities. In the alternative, it has sought a direction to the authorities to frame and implement a fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory rehabilitation or relocation policy before taking any coercive action affecting their livelihood.
The matter is expected to have implications for several similarly situated traders and business establishments operating within the Walled City area who are stated to be affected by the notification and subsequent actions.
As the matter came up for hearing, the Division Bench comprising Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi and Justice Deepak Manchanda issued notice of motion, including notice regarding stay. The case has been adjourned to June 22.
