{"id":498,"date":"2018-01-20T07:10:26","date_gmt":"2018-01-20T07:10:26","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.wakilsahab.in\/news\/?p=498"},"modified":"2018-01-20T07:10:26","modified_gmt":"2018-01-20T07:10:26","slug":"ban-sale-of-liquor-on-case-by-case-basis-bombay-high-court-tells-maharashtra-government","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.wakilsahab.in\/news\/ban-sale-of-liquor-on-case-by-case-basis-bombay-high-court-tells-maharashtra-government\/","title":{"rendered":"Ban sale of liquor on case-by-case basis, Bombay high court tells Maharashtra government"},"content":{"rendered":"

Source:- hindustantimes.com<\/strong><\/p>\n

In the absence of a clear notification classifying highways in Maharashtra, the state government cannot pass a blanket order to close down liquor shops and bars along any or all central roads, the Bombay high court held on Monday.<\/p>\n

A bench of justice Shantanu Kemkar and justice MS Sonak directed the secretary of the public works department (roads) and the commissioner, state excise department, to consider the applications of affected establishments on a \u201ccase-to-case basis\u201d to confirm whether or not it fell within the 500m prohibited area along a state or national highway.<\/p>\n

The bench directed the authorities to decide on and pass \u201creasonable orders\u201d for each application made by restaurants, clubs, liquor shops, etc. affected by the ban by July 5 this year.<\/p>\n

The court was hearing pleas filed by liquor vendors and restaurant owners, terming the state\u2019s implementation of the ban \u201carbitrary\u201d.<\/p>\n

The petitioners had challenged a notice issued by the state excise department in May this year, asking them to shut shop. They had argued that besides banning sale of liquor along highways, the state, through the notice, had also asked such establishments to shut shop that were located within 500m of \u2018state roads,\u2019 or \u2018mainways\u2019, which are merely important roads running along the state.<\/p>\n

They said there are about 250-300 such roads termed as mainways in the state\u2019s road development plan and that these can\u2019t be equated with state highways since they are not notified as the same.<\/p>\n

On the last hearing, HC had asked the state to produce its notification classifying highways under section 3 of the Maharashtra Highways Act.<\/p>\n

On Monday, however, the state submitted it couldn\u2019t find the notification and it wasn\u2019t even \u201cnecessary\u201d to get into the classification as the ban had been implemented keeping in the \u201cspirit of the SC order,\u201d which was to prevent accidents. Thus, liquor sale had been banned along \u201call traffic heavy roads in the state,\u201d the government said.<\/p>\n

While the court dismissed the state\u2019s argument, it refused to extend interim relief by way of a stay to all petitioners saying that while it \u201cunderstood the petitioners\u2019 argument of a breach of their Right to Livelihood, preventing accidents along the highways and thus, upholding the citizens\u2019 Right to life was more important.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t <\/div><\/div>\n\t\t