What is Your Opinion on Korean Restaurants in Anantapur Not Allowing Indians to Enter?

It has been brought to my attention that certain Korean restaurants in Anantapur, Andhra Pradesh, have been denying entry to Indian customers, raising concerns about the constitutionality of such practices.

This action is clearly in violation of Article 15(2) of the Indian Constitution, which prohibits discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. It would be helpful to clarify the nature of these establishments to determine whether they are private or government-owned. If they are private, it might be permissible to have some level of discrimination based on certain criteria, which is a topic of intense debate. However, denying entry to Indian customers based on their nationality or ethnicity appears to be discriminatory and against the law.

Specific Cases and Observations

Based on my personal experiences and observations, here are some examples from other parts of India:

Japanese Restaurant in Tamil Nadu

Moshi Moshi, located in a resort called Hudson Resort on the Sriperumbudur highway, allowed free entry into the resort, and customers were charged only for the restaurant meal.

Another Japanese restaurant, Kuuraku, situated in the basement of a 4-star hotel called Hotel Green Park in Chennai, did not require customers to go through the hotel lobby to access the restaurant.

Onis Restaurant in Chennai, a part of Onis Hotel, was open to all without advertisements or boards and had a significantly lesser number of customers.

Korean Restaurants in Tamil Nadu

Cheong Ki Wa, a Korean restaurant in Chennai, part of a guesthouse, had less foot traffic but allowed entry to non-Korean customers without restrictions.

Another instance, Onis Restaurant, located in Chennai, did not have any signs similar to the disputed video in Anantapur and remained accessible to all individuals.

These observations indicate that, in certain cases, private establishments are being lenient on discriminatory practices, which is commendable.

Legal and Ethical Implications

While the constitutionality of such practices is open to debate, it is imperative to ensure that businesses operate within legal boundaries. The restaurant owners should understand that maintaining discriminatory practices will not enhance their business reputation. On the contrary, it might deter potential customers and harm their standing in society.

It is essential that legal notice be served and a formal complaint made against establishments that continue such discriminatory practices. If justice is not served through these channels, taking the matter to court may be necessary to uphold the law.

A Do-Not Discriminate Policy by Law

While private establishments might have the right to discriminate, it would be hypocritical for them to deny non-Korean customers while allowing other forms of discrimination such as denying entry to individuals from lower socio-economic backgrounds (SC/ST) or religious minorities (Brahmins, etc.). In a democratic society, such practices should be neither tolerated nor condoned.

As a SC/ST individual, it is worrisome to observe discriminatory practices in private businesses. However, it is crucial to maintain a balance between individual rights and business freedoms while ensuring that laws are followed and respect for all individuals is upheld.

Conclusion

The practices of certain Korean restaurants in Anantapur and similar cases present significant legal and ethical challenges. Addressing these issues is essential to upholding the principles of equality and justice enshrined in the Indian Constitution. It is a call for responsible business practices and adherence to legal and moral standards.