SC reserves its order in industrial alcohol case

NEW DELHI: A nine-judge constitution bench of Supreme Court on Thursday reserved judgment on whether states have the power to regulate industrial alcohol, a crucial issue that the chief justice said “has confounded generations of lawyers.”

The Centre argued that under the Constitution it has the power to regulate any form of alcohol unfit for human consumption. But states like Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Maharashtra, Punjab and Kerala claimed they have exclusive authority over all intoxicating liquors, including industrial alcohol derived from rectified spirit used to produce alcoholic beverages. The bench led by CJI Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud concluded the proceedings arising from 30 appeals that challenged a 1990 SC order stripping states of control over industrial alcohol.

The states argued that since the base material for alcoholic drinks is rectified spirit or extra neutral alcohol (ENA), regulating its production, manufacture and sale falls under their jurisdiction for licensing, excise fees and other purposes.But solicitor general Tushar Mehta, arguing for the Centre, said “alcohol” has a wide meaning and is used across industries, with only “potable liquor” excluded from the Centre’s regulatory powers under the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951.

The Centre relied on legislative entries allowing it to regulate specified industries and products “where the control... by the Union is declared by Parliament...to be expedient in public interest.” But the chief justice noted the court’s observation that “unless there is a notified order, Parliament cannot be said to have intention to oust the state from a particular field.”