‘Why don’t you amend Prohibition Act for paradigm shift in liquor policy?’

If the Tamil Nadu government wants to make a paradigm shift in its prohibition policy by permitting the serving of liquor in stadia, conference halls and convention centres, why doesn’t it “boldly” amend the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 1937 itself rather than just amending the statutory rules framed under the law, asked the Madras High Court on Friday.

Sitting along with Chief Justice Sanjay V. Gangapurwala, Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy posed the question during the hearing of two public interest litigation (PIL) petitions filed by K. Balu, of the Advocates Forum for Social Justice, who had challenged two Government Orders issued on March 18 and April 24 last year that introduced a special liquor licence regime.

Senior Counsel N.L. Rajah told the court that the government had come up with a third G.O. on Thursday for issuance of special licences to possess and serve liquor in stadia, conference halls and convention centres during national/international events, and that his client intended to challenge the latest G.O. too, by filing a separate PIL petition.

Mr. Rajah told the court that all three G.O.s had attempted to introduce the special licence regime by amending the Tamil Nadu Liquor (Licence and Permit) Rules, 1981 though Section 4A of the Prohibition Act clearly states that a person found in a state of intoxication in any public place could be imprisoned for up to three months or imposed with a fine of ₹1,000.

He further said the 1937 Act permits the manufacture, possession and sale of liquor under strict conditions. In 2003, the State government abolished the interference of private parties in the liquor business and gave exclusive privilege of both wholesale as well as retails sales to the Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation (Tasmac), a government undertaking, by amending the Act.

Therefore, as the law stands today, only Tasmac can be in possession of liquor at any point of time and such a right could not be given to organisers of national/international events through the backdoor method of amending the statutory rules alone without touching either Section 4A or any other provision of the Act, he argued.

He said that the State government would have to place the latest G.O. too, before the Assembly since the two other G.O.s passed last year were tabled in the Assembly at the instance of the first Division Bench. The judges granted him time till March 20 to file one more PIL petition challenging the new G.O.

The Chief Justice told Advocate General P.S. Raman, “His [Mr. Rajah’s] contention is that you should first amend the Section (4A) and then permit everything. The moment you amend the Section, it will be a pill for all ills.”

Justice Chakravarthy said that all along, the State government had been following a policy of not allowing liquor during sports, cultural and such other events organised in stadia, convention centres and convention halls.“It [now] appears that we are trying to shift to the western way. Take a decision very boldly by amending the Act if you want to bolster liquor,” the judge said.