Disposed

Sanjay Hiralal Jaiswal v. the Union of India and Others

Bombay HC29 Aug 2017WP/10638/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Aurangabad disposed of three connected writ petitions filed by liquor shop owners. The court noted Supreme Court directions clarifying that prohibitions against liquor sales near highways do not apply to licensed establishments within municipal areas and directed the State Government to reconsider the cancellation of the applicants' licenses.

What did the court decide?

The writ petitions stand disposed.

Sanjay Hiralal Jaiswal Vs the Union of India… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

wp10638.17

¶2

( 1 )

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.10638 OF 2017

¶5

Sanjay Hiralal Jaiswal..Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The Union of India ..Respondents
and others

¶8

Mr.Ajeet B. Kale, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr.S.G.Karlekar, AGP for the respondent/State
Mr.Ajay G. Talhar, Advocate for respondent No.1

¶9

WITH

¶10

WRIT PETITION NO.10642 OF 2017

¶11

Versus

¶12

The Union of India..Respondents
and others

¶13

Mr.Ajeet B. Kale, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr.P.S.Patil, AGP for the respondent/State
Mr.Ajay G. Talhar, Advocate for respondent No.1

¶14

WITH

¶15

Chayabai Shashikant Jaiswal..Petitioner

¶16

Versus

¶17

The Union of India..Respondents
and others

¶18

Mr.Ajeet B. Kale, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr.P.S.Patil, AGP for the respondent/State

¶19

WITH

¶20

WRIT PETITION NO.10647 OF 2017

¶21

Jayashree Bharat Khare..Petitioner

¶22

Versus

¶23

The Union of India..Respondents
and others

¶24

Mr.Ajeet B. Kale, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr.S.G.Karlekar, AGP for the respondent/State
Mr.Bhushan B. Kulkarni, Advocate for respondent No.1

¶25

CORAM : R.M. BORDE &
S.M. GAVHANE, JJ.
DATED :29.08.2017

¶26

P.C. :-

¶27

.The petitioners are operating liquor shop/bar
and are engaged in retail sale of liquor. In view of the
directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court while
disposing of the Civil Appeal Nos. 12164-12166 of 2016
(Special Leave Petition) decided on 15.12.2016 the State
Government and the Commissioner for State Excise/District
Collector proceeded to direct the cancellation of liquor
license of the petitioner and liquor shop/Bar operated by
the petitioners have been put under seal. The Hon'ble
Supreme Court while considering the interim application

¶28

presented aforesaid Special Leave Petition(Civil) No.
10243 of 2017, has directed modification of certain
conditions incorporated in earlier order. Paragraph No.7
of the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court is
relevant for our consideration which is quoted as below.

¶29

7.The purpose of the directions
contained in the order dated 15th December, 2016
is to deal with the sale of liquor along and in
proximity of highways properly understood, which
provide connectivity between cities, towns and
villages. The order does not prohibit licensed
establishments within municipal areas. This
clarification shall govern other municipal areas
as well. We have considered it appropriate to
issue this clarification to set at rest any
ambiguity and to obviate repeated recourse to
IAs, before the Court.

¶30

2.In view of the directions as above the
prohibition imposed for running liquor shops/Bar
operating within the limits of Municipal areas shall have
to be reconsidered by the State Government and the
Commissioner.

¶31

3.Learned AGP appearing for the State informed
that the State Government would take appropriate steps
for implementation of the revised directions issued by
the Hon'ble Supreme Court while disposing of Special
Leave Petition (Civil) No.10243 of 2017 and will take

¶32

( 4 ) wp10638.17

¶33

corrective steps. The respondent/State shall take
appropriate corrective steps within a period of three
weeks from today.

¶34

4.With the above directions, the writ petitions
stand disposed of.

¶35

[S.M. GAVHANE, J.] [R.M. BORDE, J.]

¶36

VishalK/ wp10638.17

Sanjay Hiralal Jaiswal v. the Union of India and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Hiralal Jaiswal v. the Union of India and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prajakata Appa Nandedkar through Natural Guardian Appa Sitaram Nandedkar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sarthak Khanderao Mandewad Vs Maharashtra University of Health Sciences, Nashik and Others

Kamalbai Srumant Savant and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Rangnath Tulshiram Thoge Died Lrs Babasaheb Rangnath Thoge and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Suresh Shatrughan Bansode Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

M/S Maharashtra Shetkari Sugars Ltd. Factory Shri Uttam Nagar Beed and Others Vs Punjab National Bank Mumbai and Others