[ad_1]
The Supreme Court suspended an order from the Madras Superior Court on May 8 on Friday to close liquor stores in the State with immediate effect to maintain physical distance until the COVID-19 blockade is lifted or modified.
A bank of judges L. Nageswara Rao, S.K. Kaul and B.R. Gavai also froze the proceedings in the superior court even when he issued a formal notice to the defendants (who were PIL petitioners in the superior court), asking them to respond within four weeks.
For the State, Chief Counsel Mukul Rohatgi, Additional Counsel General Balaji Srinivasan and Counsel Yogesh Kanna vociferously argued that the order of the superior court is arbitrary and unreasonable. It is a case of the judiciary that invades state policy. “It is the state’s decision how and what to sell … Why should the high court enter? Why does a person need an Aadhaar card to buy liquor? Also, we cannot trust anyone to carry liquor. There will be riots. Tamil Nadu is not like Delhi, “Mr. Rohatgi introduced.
Mr. Srinivasan stated that the State has already imposed restrictions and is closely enforcing and monitoring social distancing regulations. He said that the higher court was out of his domain. The conditions imposed by the higher court, such as a person who cannot buy more than two bottles of alcohol of any kind and must give details of Aadhaar at the time of the sale, were illogical and unfeasible, Srinivasan argued.
Mr. Rohatgi noted that delivering liquor at home would expose him to adulteration and also cause social and domestic problems. “Tamil Nadu is a great state unlike Delhi,” he presented during the video conference hearing.
Both Mr. Rohatgi and Mr. Srinivasan said that the higher court decision would lead to an indefinite closure of the liquor stores. This would lead to ‘serious’ income and business losses.
Srinivasan noted that the Supreme Court’s ban order was passed the same day the Supreme Court dismissed an identical call to close liquor stores across the country. Furthermore, the Supreme Court had clarified on May 8 that a decision on online sales and home delivery of spirits would be at the sole discretion of the States.
The Tamil Nadu liquor retail business is owned and operated by Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited (TASMAC). The supreme court order of May 8 for an open ban was based on requests from parties interested in keeping state liquor stores closed.
On the subject of online liquor sales and home delivery, Tamil Nadu has specifically maintained that “electronic payment and home delivery require immense logistics coordination, supply chain management, which requires labor, especially in the current situation of COVID-18 “.
Furthermore, it has pointed out that the Tamil Nadu Liquor (License and Permit) Rules, 1981 did not provide for online sales. The state would also have to amend the Tamil Nadu Street Liquor Selling Rules (in stores and bars) of 2003. The higher court cannot dictate the liquor selling policy to the government.
On May 5, the State issued a government order to resume the operation of the TASMAC stores from May 7. The order was in line with a directive issued by the Union Ministry of the Interior on May 1 that allowed the sale of liquor in the States, subject to physical distancing.
.
[ad_2]
