On Friday(24th May),The Bombay High Court grants permission for liquor sales in Mumbai on June 4, coinciding with the Lok Sabha election results announcement, providing relief to vendors. This decision follows concerns over potential alcohol sales bans during the electoral process.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
MUMBAI: On Friday(24th May), The Bombay High Court has granted permission for hotels and liquor stores in Mumbai to sell liquor on June 4, the day when the votes for the Lok Sabha elections will be counted and the results declared. This decision, announced on Friday, brings relief to liquor vendors who were facing a potential ban on alcohol sales due to the elections.
A vacation bench comprising Justices NR Borkar and Somasekhar Sundaresan delivered the ruling, modifying an earlier order by the Mumbai City Collector dated April 2. This prior order had imposed a prohibition on the operation of alcohol licenses in light of the parliamentary elections, effectively banning the sale of liquor on the vote counting day.
The bench modified an earlier order issued by the Mumbai City Collector on April 2, which had prohibited the operation of alcohol licenses due to the parliamentary elections. The modification was based on a precedent set by a co-ordinate bench on May 3, which had lifted similar restrictions in the Raigad district of Maharashtra after the declaration of election results.
“In accordance with the aforementioned order, it is appropriate to direct the Mumbai city collector that the restriction on alcohol sales will cease to be in effect after the election results are declared,”
-the vacation bench stated in its order on Friday.
The order came in response to a petition filed by the Indian Hotel and Restaurant Association (AHAR), which challenged the April 2 circular declaring June 4 as a dry day. Advocate Veena Thadani, representing AHAR, argued that the prohibitory order for June 4 was issued despite the likelihood that the vote counting would be completed and results declared by the afternoon.
AHAR highlighted that they had approached the Collector to review the decision but were informed that the order could not be changed as it was based on the directions of the Election Commission of India (ECI). The notification had prohibited the sale of liquor within the region starting 48 hours prior to the voting day.
“Whenever authorized liquor outlets are closed, illegal businesses thrive, making huge profits from unlawful sales,”
-AHAR claimed, emphasizing the unintended consequences of the prohibition.
Additional government pleader Jyoti Chavan informed the vacation bench that the Mumbai suburban district collector had already modified his order to limit the restriction on liquor sale until the declaration of results. However, no such modification had been made by the Mumbai City Collector.
The vacation bench emphasised the need for parity across different regions and proceeded to allow the sale of liquor after the declaration of election results.
“Parity is required across all regions”
-the bench remarked, noting the inconsistency in the implementation of the restrictions.
The High Court’s decision brings a sigh of relief to the hospitality sector, which had been anticipating significant losses due to the dry day order. This ruling ensures that authorized outlets can operate legally, thus reducing the likelihood of illegal liquor sales and associated activities.
This order not only impacts the economic activities of hotels and liquor stores but also sets a precedent for future election-related restrictions. The case underscores the balance required between regulatory measures and the practical implications for businesses and consumers.
By lifting the prohibition on liquor sales post-election results, the Bombay High Court has demonstrated a pragmatic approach, aligning with previous judicial orders and ensuring consistency across different regions. This decision reinforces the importance of judicial oversight in the implementation of administrative directives, particularly those that impact economic activities and public order.
CASE TITLE:
Indian Hotel and Restaurant Association v. Collector of Mumbai (Suburbs) State Excise Department.