Chhattisgarh High Court quashed State Government’s Order to operate Liquor Shops during the Lockdown

Must Read

Himachal Pradesh High Court Supports Promotion Based on Seniority of Post Rather Based on the Eligibility Test

In the case of Ramesh Chand Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others, the petitioner, reached the court as...

NCDRC Dismisses PIL against Urologist, Holy Family Hospital, Says Mode Of Treatment Or Skill Differs From Doctor To Doctor

The National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) dismissed a petition against Holy Family Hospital and a Urologist, alleging negligence...

Himachal Pradesh High Court Disposes Suit for Possession and Permanent Prohibitory Injunction Due To Mutual Consent

In the case of Parveen Kumar vs Smt. Vijay Laxmi and Ors, the Petitioner, Parveen had filed a suit for declaration,...

Supreme Court Appoints Committee To Examine Arbitrariness of Sealing of Resorts in Elephant Corridor, Tamil Nadu

A Full Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India, in the matter of Hospitality Association of Mudumalai V. In...

Madhya Pradesh High Court Rules That Export Ban on N95 Masks & PPE Kits Does Not Violate Fundamental Right of Traders

The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the formulation and regulation of trade policies were within the subjects of...

Delhi High Court Issues Notice To Two Pleas Filed Praying for Recognition of Same-Sex Marriage

The Court heard two writ petitions which urged that the Special Marriage Act and the Foreign Marriage Act be...

Follow us

The Chhattisgarh High Court quashed the order which provided for a committee to be established to look after the preparation to operate liquor shops throughout the states during the lockdown.

Social Worker Mamta Sharma filed a PIL questioning the Chhattisgarh State Marketing Corporation limited order to constitute a committee to take steps regarding preparations to operate the liquor shops throughout the state. Prathmesh Mishra had filed an intervention petition, a suo moto petition related to the coronavirus pandemic.

Petitioner’s Argument

Rohit Sharma, a learned counsel for the Mamta Sharma and Prathmesh Sharma’s counsel Prateek Sharma had submitted that the Ministry of Home Affairs of Central Government has not granted any relaxation to the State Government to operate the liquor shops throughout the states during the lockdown period as per notified by the National Disaster Management Authority on March 24.

The counsels also said that as per the notification, the lockdown in all parts of the country is for 21 days.

Therefore, no such relaxation for the operation of liquor shops has been granted either by the National Disaster Management Authority or the Ministry of Home Affairs because neither the State Government nor the Marketing Corporation has the authority to take steps to operate the liquor shops.

Respondent’s Argument

The Advocate General and Shri Rajeev Shrivastava urged that the first order issued by the state government prohibiting the operation of liquor shops in the state was issued on March 31 and till April 7.

However, the counsels were not able to satisfy as to how the Marketing Corporation’s order dated 2nd April 2020 can survive after the State Government’s order dated 7th April 2020 whereby the state government decided to extend the ban on the sale of liquor till 14th April 2020 when the lockdown notification issued by the Central Government remains in force. Therefore, the marketing corporation started preparations on April 2 in contemplation of commencement of operations of liquor shops after 7 April, the same had not happened, the Corporation’s order dated 2nd April 2020 cannot be allowed to remain intact.

Court’s Decision

The bench has nonetheless has granted the liberty in favour of state government to take a decision in the matter based on the new lockdown notification. The division bench of Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Goutam Bhaduri said that the petition has been disposed on the technical grounds and did not express its opinion on the merits of the contentions raised by the petitioner or the respondents.

However, the step taken by the State Government in according to the fresh lockdown notification issued under the National Disaster Management Act and it will remain open for the petitioner as well as the respondent to move afresh before the court. Thus, the order dated 2nd April 2020 has been quashed along with the writ petitions. The writ petition filed by the petitioner and intervention application has also been disposed of.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Himachal Pradesh High Court Supports Promotion Based on Seniority of Post Rather Based on the Eligibility Test

In the case of Ramesh Chand Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others, the petitioner, reached the court as he was aggrieved by the...

NCDRC Dismisses PIL against Urologist, Holy Family Hospital, Says Mode Of Treatment Or Skill Differs From Doctor To Doctor

The National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) dismissed a petition against Holy Family Hospital and a Urologist, alleging negligence in diagnosing the septicemia and...

Himachal Pradesh High Court Disposes Suit for Possession and Permanent Prohibitory Injunction Due To Mutual Consent

In the case of Parveen Kumar vs Smt. Vijay Laxmi and Ors, the Petitioner, Parveen had filed a suit for declaration, possession and a permanent prohibitory...

Supreme Court Appoints Committee To Examine Arbitrariness of Sealing of Resorts in Elephant Corridor, Tamil Nadu

A Full Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India, in the matter of Hospitality Association of Mudumalai V. In Defence of Environment and Animals...

Madhya Pradesh High Court Rules That Export Ban on N95 Masks & PPE Kits Does Not Violate Fundamental Right of Traders

The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the formulation and regulation of trade policies were within the subjects of the Central Government. Any reasonable...

Delhi High Court Issues Notice To Two Pleas Filed Praying for Recognition of Same-Sex Marriage

The Court heard two writ petitions which urged that the Special Marriage Act and the Foreign Marriage Act be interpreted to also apply to...

Supreme Court Allows Appeal Challenging Allahabad High Court Order Granting Interim Bail on Medical Grounds

An appeal was filed before the Supreme Court, challenging the Judgment & Order of the Allahabad High Court in the matter of State of U.P...

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Seeking Lawyers and Legal Clerks To Travel in Local Trains

The present hearing arose out of a batch of Public Interest Litigations that was filed in the Bombay High Court to permit the members...

Provisions for Retirement of Teachers Must Be Read With the Larger Interest of Students in Mind: Supreme Court

Supreme Court in Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal v State of Uttarakhand reinstated the appellants to their position as Professor on basis of re-employment till the...

Parties Cannot Deny Specific Performance Merely Due To Delay: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, in Ferrodous Estate v P Gopirathnam, revisited the law on the specific performance of a contract. It reiterated that mere delay...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -