Excerpts from an interview.

Q. A major concern affecting the reputation of restaurants lately is the serving of liquor to underage individuals, some of whom have been involved in fatal crashes. What measures can be taken to address this issue?

Pranav M Rungta: We are still following the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949; our excise act is archaic! We are allowed to serve liquor only in certain sections and must maintain a daily log of alcohol purchases and sales, submitted to the excise department. Currently, the legal drinking age is 21 for beer and 25 for hard liquor, meaning you have to be 21 to enter a premises serving alcohol. We are advocating for a reduction in the legal drinking age to 21 across the board, as we believe it’s a reasonable age for responsible drinking.

However, more is needed to solve the problem. Bartenders lack the authority to refuse service to a guest, and similarly, the valet has no right to refuse an intoxicated person from handing over his or her car keys. There’s also a class bias at play here and threats of police complaints. We need awareness drives and responsible drinking programs to educate people on handling alcohol. The industry cannot be solely blamed for a few stray incidents.

Q. BMC officials recently demolished part of a restaurant where a young man drank before causing a fatal accident. How does the NRAI reflect on this?

Pranav M Rungta: We strongly condemn it. The incidents in Pune and Mumbai, where restaurants were shut down or demolished, were knee-jerk reactions that won’t solve the larger problem. Maintaining law and order is the job of the police. If someone drinks at home and causes a crime, would officials shut down or demolish the house too? If something was illegal, the BMC should follow due process, serving notice and allowing time to respond, rather than bulldozing, which sends a negative message about the rule of law.

Before Covid, Mumbai had strict checks for drinking and driving, effectively deterring such behaviour. The police were occupied with other roles during the pandemic but they need to return to enforcing these checks strongly.

Q. We are seeing more people eating out than before, but hygiene is a growing concern, with incidents like a dead rat in food, a chopped finger in ice cream, or poor cleaning practices. How can this be handled?

Pranav M Rungta: Honestly, these issues mostly occur in the unorganised sector. The organised sector is very aware of hygiene, especially post-Covid, as customers are more conscious about it. We follow the FSSAI’s training modules and guidelines. Major chains adhere to even higher hygiene standards, following global practices. Some establishments still operate under old systems, but they are either slowly dying out or being taken over by a new generation that values hygiene.

Another issue is also licensing. In Mumbai, the BMC issues health licences, with the chief medical officer (CMO) as the authority. While the CMO understands medical aspects, they may lack the specific knowledge required for restaurant sanitation and health standards. A strong government body like FSSAI dedicated to enforcing these standards is essential to deter violations and prevent such incidents.

Q. The recent NRAI report demanded ‘one nation, one licence’ for restaurants. How would this help?

Pranav M Rungta: Currently, two bodies grant licences to food businesses. The first is the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI), a central body under the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. The FSSAI understands restaurant operations and issues relevant guidelines. However, each state has its own norms, resulting in dual authorities. Some states require 17 licences, while others require up to 32, more than a gun licence.

In Maharashtra, for instance, both Thane Municipal Corporation (TMC) and the Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation (NMMC) accept the FSSAI licence for health and sanitation but BMC mandates a 394 licence from its Chief Medical Officer (CMO). If FSSAI becomes the sole agency issuing all necessary licences under ‘one nation, one licence,’ the process would be streamlined and red tape reduced. This would ease operations for entrepreneurs opening restaurants in different states and benefit international brands establishing outlets nationwide.

Q. We always celebrate new restaurant openings, but many are also shutting down. What’s going wrong?

Pranav M Rungta: The high mortality rate is disheartening! With no entry barriers, many people enter this industry, thinking it’s glamorous and often leaving high-paying jobs without understanding its demands. It’s a capital-heavy industry, but lacking industry status, we can’t get formal loans.

Unless you’re a big company with angel capital, most rely on personal savings or borrow from friends and family. Various factors can lead to failure. Food preferences vary widely, competition is intense, rentals are high, and the licensing process is very demanding. These challenges make it tough to sustain a restaurant.

Q. How big a problem does rent pose for the restaurant industry? Can rents be streamlined?

Pranav M Rungta: Rent is a significant issue as the restaurant business is location-dependent. Prime locations ensure decent business but come with premium rents, often multiple times what they should be, making it a very expensive proposition. For example, in Mumbai, the BMC only allows certain properties to be converted into restaurants due to strict norms, such as requiring two exits, one for fire safety.

Many properties aren’t viable because they can’t accommodate these exits. However, malls increasingly recognise the importance of restaurants in boosting foot traffic and are allocating more space for them. The percentage of space dedicated to restaurants has increased from single digits to double digits, which is a positive development.