Chattisgarh High Court
M/S Nikhil Food And Beverages vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 14 December, 2021
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Writ Petition (C) No. 5084 of 2021
1. M/s Nikhil Food And Beverages, A Proprietorship Firm, Through
Proprietor Nikhil Tiwari S/o Shankar Tiwari, Aged About 30 Years
Situated At Main Road, Telhibandha, Raipur, District Raipur
Chhattisgarh
2. White Earth Through Operator Ravi Kumar Ahuja S/o Dhanraj Ahuja,
Aged About 23 Years, Situated At 3rd Floor, Sheetal Complex,
Marine Drive, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh
3. Chitwan Maggi Point Through Operator Tilottama Swain D/o Naresh
Kumar Swain, Aged About 29 Years, Situated At H. No. 204, In front
Of New Delhi Sweets, Samta Colony, Raipur, District Raipur
Chhattisgarh
4. The Bambz Cafe Through Operator Moh. Anish Khan Nizami S/o
Moh. Raees Khan, Aged About 29 Years, Situated At Opposite
Marine Drive, Telhibandha, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh
5. Club Mithya Through Operator Bhuneshwar Gilhare S/o Amrit Lal
Gilhare, Aged About 27 Years, Situated At V. I. P. Road, Raipur
District Raipur, Chhattisgarh
6. M. P. S Kitchen And Caterers Through Operator Sagar Gulati S/o
Late Surendra Gulati, Aged About 30 Years, Situated At Labhandi
Beside Apollo Petrol Pump, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh
7. The Living Room Cafe Through Operator Rahul Dhuppad S/o Vinod
Dhuppad, Aged About 29 Years, Situated At V. I. P. Road, Raipur
District Raipur, Chhattisgarh
8. M. K. Foods, Through Operator Sikander Khemani S/o Hanif
Khemani, Aged About 29 Years, Situated At V. I. P. Road, Near Oyo
Sri Hotel, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh
9. Sky Lounge And Cafe Through Operator Kailash Chhabaria S/o
Ramchand Chhabaria, Aged About 53 Years Situated At V. I. P.
Road, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh
10. Fill In The Blanks Restaurant (A Venture Of United Star Food
Pvt. Ltd.) Through Operator Vimal Kashyap S/o Ramdas Kashyap,
2
Aged About 33 Years, Situated At Near Agrasen Dham, Behind VW
Canyon Hotel, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh
---- Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Home
Affairs, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur
Chhattisgarh
2. The Secretary, Department Of Excise, Mantralaya, Mahanadi
Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh
3. The Superintendent Of Police, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh
4. Station House Officer, Telhibandha, Police Station Raipur, District
Raipur, Chhattisgarh
5. Station House Officer, Saraswati Nagar Police Station, Raipur, District
Raipur, Chhattisgarh
6. Station House Officer, Mandirhasaud Police Station, Raipur, District
Raipur, Chhattisgarh
---- Respondents
For Petitioners : Mr. Kishore Bhaduri, Sr. Advocate along with Mr.
Ankur Agrawal and Mr. Pankaj Singh, Advocates
For State : Mr. Rahul Jha, Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy
Order On Board
14.12.2021
1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking for the following
reliefs:
i) That the Honourable Court may kindly be pleased to issue
appropriate writ/writs, order/orders to call for entire record
even any order or notification if any passed by the State
authorities for banning of hookah.
ii) That, the Honourable Court may kingly be pleased to
issue appropriate writ/writs, order/orders to quash the oral
directions by the respondent authorities for banning and
prohibiting to serve hookah in the petitioner's premises to
their customer and further to co-operate with the petitioner
and allow the petitioner to serve hookah facilities to their
customer without any hindrance in running the business.
2. A plain perusal of the relief clause itself would show that there is no
order as such passed by the respondents which has been subjected
to challenge by way of the present writ petition. The only contention of
the petitioners is the alleged oral instructions received from the
officers of the local administration so far as the operation of the
petitioners' Cafe from where they are said to be serving fruit flavoured
Hookah.
3. Learned counsel appearing for petitioners submits that under similar
circumstances some of the cafe owners have been issued certain
notices which have already been subjected to challenge in WPC No.
4884/2021 where there appears to be an interim protection on
01.12.2021. However, so far as the present petitioners are
concerned, admittedly there are no notice or written instructions
issued by the State authorities which can be subjected to challenge in
the present writ petition.
4. The fact that the present is a writ petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India it would mandatorily require for the petitioners to
assail a particular action on the part of the respondents whereby any
of the fundamental rights of the petitioners has been infringed. In the
absence of any such order or action or notice issued by the
respondents, this Court would find it difficult in entertaining a writ
petition.
5. However, it goes without saying that even if it may be an oral
instruction issued by the local administration, it should always have a
force of law flowing from a statute and issued under any of the said
provisions of law under which regulatory steps can be taken by the
local administration. It is also worthwhile to mention that under similar
circumstances, this Court has already dealt with a writ petition i.e.
WPC No. 1746/2020 decided on 16.09.2020.
6. The respondent authorities if at all if they intend to issue any
instruction to the petitioners so far as the regulating of the Cafe that
were serving Hookah, the instructions ought to be strictly in
accordance with the statutory provisions governing the field as on
date and also keeping in view the judgment rendered by this Court in
WPC No. 1746/2020.
7. Accordingly, the present writ petition in the given factual matrix
stands disposed of being not maintainable at this juncture.
Sd/-
(P. Sam Koshy)
Judge
Khatai
