Allowed

Swapnil Ramesh Raut v. State of Maharashtra, through Principal Secretary, Home (State Excise) Dept and Ors.

Bombay HC18 Jun 2018WP/4517/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment disposed of three writ petitions by following the earlier judgment in M/s. Arss Biofuel Pvt. Ltd., striking down specific rules under the Bombay Denatured Spirit Rules and exempting certain activities from licensing under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act.

What did the court decide?

Bombay Denatured Spirit Rules, 1959 (Rules 23-62) struck down; no licence required under Maharashtra Prohibition Act for denatured spirit activities.

Swapnil Ramesh Raut Vs State of Maharashtra… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

1-3-4517-5386.2018.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 4517 OF 2014

¶5

Swapnil Ramesh Raut … Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Maharashtra and Ors.

¶8

… Respondents

¶9

ALONG WITH WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 15775 OF 2018

¶10

M/s. A.A. Attarwal and Company … Petitioner

¶11

Versus

¶12

The State of Maharashtra and Ors. … Respondents

¶13

AND WRIT PETITION NO. 5386 OF 2018

¶14

Dhanashree Ethanol (I) Pvt. Ltd.

¶15

… Petitioner

¶16

Versus The State of Maharashtra and Ors. … Respondents

¶17

(No R & P in WP No.4517 of 2014).

¶18

Mr. Vinayak Salokhe i/by Mr.Santosh L. Patil for the petitioners in all the petitions.

¶19

Mr. M.M. Pabale, AGP for the respondent State in WP No. 4517 of 2014 and WP (St) No. 15775 of 2018.

¶20

Mr. Sandeep Babar, AGP for the respondent State in WP No.5386 of 2018.

¶21

CORAM : SHANTANU KEMKAR &

¶22

NITIN W. SAMBRE, JJ. DATE : JUNE 18, 2018

¶23

P.C. :

¶24

Parties through their counsel.

¶25

¶26

nilegaonkar

¶27

1-3-4517-5386.2018.odt

¶28

It is not in dispute that the question involved in these Petitions is covered by the Judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in various Writ Petitions including Writ Petition No.

¶29

8548 of 2004 in the case of M/s. Arss Biofuel Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. decided on 13th December,

¶30

2017.

¶31

In the circumstances, for the reasons stated in the judgment passed in the case of M/s. Arss Biofuel Pvt. Ltd. (supra) these Writ Petitions are disposed of in terms of the order which

¶32

reads thus :

¶33

“(a) The Bombay Denatured Spirit Rules, 1959 to the extent that they regulate the possession, use, sale, import, export and transport of denatured spirit viz. Rules 23 to 62 are ultra vires and unconstitutional and are struck down.

¶34

(b) There shall be no licence required under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act for sale, purchase, transport, possession, storage, dehydration, import and export of denatured spirit.

¶35

(c) We hereby clarify that the power of the State Government in the case of rectified spirit supplied for industrial purposes is only to see and ensure that rectified spirit, whether in the course of its manufacture or after its manufacture, is not diverted or misused for potable purpose. The State can make necessary regulations requiring the industry to submit periodical statements of

¶36

¶37

nilegaonkar

¶38

1-3-4517-5386.2018.odt

¶39

raw material and the finished product (rectified spirits) and is entitled to verify their correctness.

¶40

(d) The Writ Petitions are made absolute on the above terms with no order as to costs.”

¶41

Rule made absolute in the aforesaid terms.

¶42

(NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.)

¶43

(SHANTANU KEMKAR, J.)

¶44

¶45

nilegaonkar

Swapnil Ramesh Raut v. State of Maharashtra, through Principal Secretary, Home (State Excise) Dept and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Swapnil Ramesh Raut v. State of Maharashtra, through Principal Secretary, Home (State Excise) Dept and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shaikh Zoeb Bhai Ahmedali Bootwala and 14 Ors. Vs Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority and 24 Ors.

Patidar Seeds Pvt.Ltd Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Saifee Burhani Upliftment Trust and 15 Ors. Vs Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority and 41 Ors.

Venkat Sri Maithreya Vs Bank of Baroda

Umidali Jairazbhoy S/O. Late Sultanali Jairazbhoy Vs the Collector Mumbai City and Anr.

Il and Fs Transportation Networks Ltd. and 3 Ors. Vs Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority and 5 Ors.