The rationality of the online portal used by hotel .

Until recently Privacy was not recognized under Constitution of India however on 24^th August 2017 it all changed when the Apex Court of the Country passed a landmark judgment in K. S Puttaswamy case acknowledging the right to privacy as one of the fundamental rights as per the constitution. The Supreme Court in the above-mentioned judgment clarified that just like other fundamental rights, the right to privacy is not an absolute right and can be taken away as per the procedure established by law. It is apposite to say that the effects of this judgment will be felt not just by individuals in their daily activities but also by big corporations. Though the judgment was with regard to the Aadhar act, the judgment held that right to privacy is an integral part of Part III of the Constitution and laid down some tests which are required to be satisfied by the restrictions put by the state to interfere with the privacy right. It will be important to see how the courts and the governments will apply the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court. There is no doubt that this decision will have a large impact on our everyday life however this article will only consider the repercussions of this judgment vis a vis Tourism industry especially the validity of the direction given by the local law enforcing agencies to the hoteliers in Rajasthan.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Puttaswamy held that any law, order or direction should not breach the fundamental right of the Privacy, However all the Learned judges unanimously agree that like any other fundamental right to privacy is not an absolute right and any kind of restriction, if levied by state, should be just fair and reasonable as per the procedure established by law under article 21. In case of any kind of restriction by the state into the right to privacy of a citizen, it should satisfy the tests laid down by the Supreme Court. The three elements of the test are:-

1. Legality: The existence of a law.

2. Legitimate Goal: The law should seek to achieve a legitimate state aim  

3. Proportionality: There should be a rational nexus between the objects and the means adopted to achieve them

Recently many hotels (especially in Rajasthan) have raised the issue wherein they have been directed by the local police authorities to digitally keep the records of their guest on the Web-based Application that has been developed and run by one of the largest hospitality company of India. Generally, when we book a hotel we usually give them an id for verification and in return, we get to enjoy certain privileges along with it. We gave our consent and voluntarily submit our id to the hotel management alone. Though it is apposite to say that hotel management is bound by the local laws and is required to share this information with the local law enforcing agencies if and when required. However, guest consent is generally to the hotel he/she is staying and ipso jure to the local authorities as they can be trusted to use the knowledge to protect and increase security from any potential threats. Though the consent is generally is given to the hotel management however after the implementation of such directions the information will be shared and uploaded on the web-based portal (develop by a private entity) which will then share it with the local law enforcing agencies.  

The directions are ambiguous and unclear because they fail to answer whether hotel management is only required to upload the copy of id or any other information. It is evident that in this age of information a single speck of information about an individual is very valuable and can be injurious to the individual if misused. The 9 Judge bench of the Supreme Court in its order dated 24.08.2017 has raised the concerns of the privacy with the increase in the technology. In para 170 of the judgment, Hon’ble Court highlighted the increase in usage of web portals / internet wherein individual user leaves some kind of electronic tracks without her knowledge which can be used to know the persons interest in food, friends, hobbies which may seem insignificant but may emphasize the nature of personality of an individual.

Therefore the so-called directions given by the local law agencies to the hoteliers is illegal as it ignores the law laid down by the Apex Court. These directions do not pass the threshold test set by the Apex Court firstly there is no law to back out these directions secondly if these directions are made mandatory by the local authorities then as the court said in the abovementioned judgment that this might encourage commercial exploitation of the individual biometric and demographic information by the private entities, thirdly this direction is neither proportionate nor appropriate, because without floating any kind of tender its highly irregular of the state to direct a company to develop a portal wherein hoteliers had to share their guest id’s. Though local authorities can check for the guest identification anytime they required but to share these id’s with a private company raises some serious questions. Thus hoteliers should abstain themselves from using these web-based portal for the sake of their guest's privacy and the guest should himself be vigilant enough and ask the hotel management about the usage of such kind of portals by the hotel. State should not encourage usage of these portals till the time they do not back these directions with the law and a systematic explanation to the hotelier or guest satisfying their interest/concern by explaining the infrastructure which is used for securing the information obtained from their id's.