Bombay High Court
Navi Mumbai Hotel Oweners Association ... vs The District Collector Raigad District ... on 3 May, 2024
Author: A. S. Chandurkar
Bench: A. S. Chandurkar
2024:BHC-AS:20954-DB
TAUSEEF
LAIQUEE
Tauseef 918-WP.6389.2024.doc
FAROOQUI
Digitally signed by
TAUSEEF LAIQUEE
FAROOQUI IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Date: 2024.05.07
09:55:23 +0530 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.6389 OF 2024
1. Navi Mumbai Hotel Owners Association,
2. Shri. Mahesh S. Shetty. ...Petitioners
Versus
1. The District Collector,
Raigad District State Excise Dept.
Having his Office at Collectorate, Raigad.
2. The Principal Secretary,
Department of State Excise,
Govt. of Maharashtra, Mantralaya, Mumbai.
3. The State of Maharashtra. ...Respondents
__________
Mr. R. D. Soni a/w. Mr. Sujay Gawade, Adv. Sumedha Dhopate, Adv.
Mudita Pawar, Adv. Manasi Sawant and Ms. Rekha Keni i/b. M/s. Shree
& Co. for the Petitioners.
Mr. N. C. Walimbe, Addl. G. P. a/w Ms. T. N. Bhatia, AGP for
Respondent-State.
Mr. R. R. Kole, Superintendent, State Excise Raigad present.
__________
CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR,
JITENDRA JAIN, J.J.
DATE : 3rd MAY 2024.
JUDGMENT:
- (A. S. Chandurkar, J.)
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith, by consent of the
parties.
1 of 4
Tauseef 918-WP.6389.2024.doc
2. The challenge raised in this Writ Petition is to the order dated
2nd April 2024 that has been issued by the Collector (State Excise). By
the said order issued in exercise of powers under Section 142 of the
Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949 (for short "the Act of 1949"), a
prohibition has been imposed on the operation of licenses issued under
the Act of 1949, in view of the ensuing parliamentary elections. The
grievance of the Petitioners is that insofar as the District of Raigad is
concerned, there are two Lok Sabha constituencies of Maval and Raigad
within the said District. In the Lok Sabha constituency-Maval, the
Vidhan Sabha Constituencies of Panvel, Karjat and Uran are included.
Insofar as Lok Sabha constituency-Raigad is concerned, Vidhan Sabha
constituencies of Pen, Alibagh, Shrivardhan and Mahad are included.
3. According to the learned counsel for the Petitioners, the
impugned order seeks to restrict the operation of such licenses for the
entire Raigad District ignoring the provisions of Section 135-C of the
Representation of the People Act, 1951 (for short "the Act of 1951").
Under the said provision, it is only in the polling area that the sale of
liquor is prohibited. Since the impugned order is excessive in nature, it
is submitted that its operation deserves to be restricted in terms of
Section 135-C of the Act of 1951. Secondly, it is urged that the period
for which the prohibition should apply has not been indicated in the
impugned order. Referring to the order dated 29 th October 2021 passed
2 of 4
Tauseef 918-WP.6389.2024.doc
in Writ Petition No.12201 of 2021 ( Nanded Zilla Madya
Vikretasanghatana, through its Authorised Signatory/CL III License
Holder Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ), at the Aurangabad Bench,
it is submitted that such prohibition ought to operate only till the time
the polling is completed. It is, therefore, submitted that the impugned
order deserves to be modified accordingly.
4. The learned Additional Government Pleader supported the
impugned order and submitted that the exercise of the powers
conferred by Section 142 of the Act of 1949, there is no reason to
interfere with the said order.
5. Having considered the rival submissions, we find that the
impugned order operates far beyond the area of what is contemplated
under Section 135-C of the Act of 1951. The prohibition prescribed
under Section 135-C is only for the polling area and not beyond it. It is
true that Section 142 of the Act 1949 empowers the Collector to close a
place where any intoxicant is sold but, the exercise of such power in the
present situation ought to be guided by Section 135-C of the Act, 1951.
This is for the reason that the power under Section 142 of the Act 1949
is being exercised in the present case only in view of the parliamentary
elections. Similarly, this Court has already held in Nanded Zilha, Madya
Vikretasanghatna (supra) that beyond the polling hours, such
3 of 4
Tauseef 918-WP.6389.2024.doc
prohibition cannot operate.
6. In view of aforesaid, the following order is passed:-
(i) The order dated 2nd April 2024 issued by the Collector is
partly modified. Insofar as the prohibition for sale of
liquor in Raigad Lok Sabha constituency is concerned,
the same would operate in the Vidhan Sabha
Constituencies of Pen, Alibagh, Shrivardhan and Mahad
from 5:00 p.m. on 05.05.2024 till end of polling on
07.05.2024 and thereafter on 04.06.2024 till the
declaration of results.
(ii) Insofar as Maval Lok Sabha constituency is concerned,
the prohibition for sale of liquor would operate in Vidhan
Sabha Constituencies of Panvel, Karjat and Uran from
5:00 p.m. on 11.05.2024 till end of polling on
13.05.2024 and thereafter on 04.06.2024 till the
declaration of results.
(iii) Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no
order as to costs.
(iv) Parties to act on an authenticated copy of this order.
[JITENDRA JAIN, J.] [A. S. CHANDURKAR, J.]
4 of 4
