Court seeks clarity on compensating revenue loss due to liquor shop closures
The Madurai bench of the Madras High Court asked the State government to explain whether it can evolve a policy decision to sell liquor, which would violate the life and liberty of citizens and their family members guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.
By : migrator
Update: 2019-04-08 20:38 GMT
Madurai
Directing the Advocate General to get the government’s stand in this regard and not that of Tasmac, a division bench comprising Justice N Kirubakaran and Justice S S Sundar also sought to know why shouldn’t the government make alternate avenue for income, either by increasing the tax or introducing a new tax, to compensate the income derived from sale of liquor.
The notice was issued while the bench was hearing a plea seeking stay on Tasmac liquor shops situated in congested areas, especially where educational institutions and places of worship are located.
The petitioner, Mahendran of Thanjavur, claimed that efforts were on to set up liquor shops at busy areas where schools and temples are existing, in violation of rules and regulations. As per norms, liquor shops should not be located within 100 metres of school, college or places of worship. If the liquor shop came up near Pallia Agraharam bus stop as proposed, common people, especially students and devotees, would experience hardship, he contended, seeking a stay on setting up Tasmac liquor shop at the locality.
In response, the counsel representing Tasmac Managing Director submitted a report before the bench, stating that 500 liquor shops each were closed down in a phased manner in 2016 and 2017. So far, 1,500 liquor shops had been closed down, including 500 shops situated along National Highways that are passing through the State. In 2004, 7,896 Tasmac liquor shops remained in existence. But by March 2016, the number of shops were reduced to 6,715, As on February 26, 2019, the number of liquor shops in Tamil Nadu has come down further to 5,239. Efforts were on to further reduce existence of such liquor shops in phased manner, the counsel added.
However, the bench was not satisfied with the response, and issued notice to the State government and adjourned the case to April 23 for further hearing.
Visit news.dtnext.in to explore our interactive epaper!
Download the DT Next app for more exciting features!
Click here for iOS
Click here for Android