Disposed

Sachin Purshottam Bhairavkar v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Bombay HC24 Sept 2019PIL/120/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court in a PIL addressed issues regarding the efficacy of the State's policy allowing women to prohibit liquor sales in their villages. It directed a structured procedure for verifying signatures and conducting a formal meeting to ensure greater than 50% genuine support before action is taken.

What did the court decide?

Directing the Tahsildar to convene a meeting for face-to-face verification of women's signatures and conduct a vote to ensure authenticity of the resolution to close liquor vents.

Sachin Purshottam Bhairavkar Vs the… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

PIL 120/12

¶2

- 1 -

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

5 PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.120 OF 2012

¶5

SACHIN PURSHOTTAM BHAIRAVKAR
VERSUS

¶6

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶7

...
Advocate for Petitioner : Shri Ajinkya Kale h/f Shri
Talekar S.B. and Shri U. R. Awate
AGP for Respondent nos.1 to 5: Mrs.M.A. Deshpande
Advocate for Respondent no.6 : Shri Arvind K. Tiwari

¶8

CORAM: PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, CJ & R.G. AVACHAT, J.

¶9

DATE: 24.09.2019

¶10

PER COURT :

¶11

1] Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶12

2] On the one hand huge revenues are generated by levying excise

¶13

and additional duties on alcohol, simultaneously the State professes to eradicate the evil of alcohol. Quaint Gandhiana !

¶14

3] The State of Maharashtra has a policy empowering the women to prohibit sale of alcohol in their village if 50% of the adult women resolve

¶15

that the liquor vent be closed. It has to be proceeded by 25% women moving the resolution.

¶16

4] As per the petitioner, 50% of the women in village Savalvihir (Budruk) Tq.Rahata Dist.Ahmednagar resolved and submitted a

¶17

PIL 120/12

¶18

- 2 -

¶19

representation on 26.12.2011 that the liquor shop in their village be closed. It was statedly causing a nuisance. The grievance is that the authorities ignored the representation made by the womenfolk of the village.

¶20

5] The reply filed refers to the Census figures and pleads that as per the Census, 2322 women resided in the village. 20% thereof would be 590. It is pleaded that the representation received contained signatures of 716 women. The inspecting team of the State Excise Department verified the signatures. 280 women stated that they were misguided into signing the resolution for they were informed that the representation was to augment the civic amenities in the village. It is pleaded that 265 women denied having signed the resolution, 4 were dead and somebody have impersonated when 11 were not residing in the village and even their signatures were forged. Thus, the number of women who submitted the representation was less than 25%.

¶21

6] Needless to state, in the rejoinder filed, the petitioner denies the stand taken in the reply filed. 7] It would be a highly disputed question of fact as to whether the women who appended their signatures on the representation were misled, how many had died and how many were not residing in the village.

¶22

PIL 120/12

¶23

- 3 -

¶24

8] We are in the year 2019 today. The solution to the vexed problem is to direct that if the womenfolk of the village decide as of today that the liquor vent in the village be closed, they would be permitted to make a requisition to the Tahsildar in-charge of the revenue estate of the village. Upon receipt of the requisition, the Tahsildar shall convene a meeting of the womenfolk of the village and give publicity of the meeting by notifying the date and the time of the meeting. The Tahsildar would conduct the meeting on the date and time notified by him. In the register maintained, the signatures of the women who attend the meeting would be obtained separately. The resolution as per the requisition would be put to vote and such number of women who support the motion would be obtained so that there is authenticity to the fact as to what number of women supported the resolution to stop sale of alcohol in their village. If more than 50% of the women vote in support of the resolution to close the liquor vent, the excise authorities shall act in terms of the policy decision.

¶25

9] With the afore-stated directions, the petition is disposed of.

¶26

No costs.

¶27

(R.G. AVACHAT, J.) CHIEF JUSTICE ndk/c249193.doc

Sachin Purshottam Bhairavkar v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sachin Purshottam Bhairavkar v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shaikh Shaquir Abdulsattar Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Iftekhar Ahmed Khan Khurshid Ahmed Khan Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Prakash Manaji Chavan Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Suresh Damodar Kolhe Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Krishna Kumar Agarwal Vs the Ministry of Environment and Forest, through Its Secretary, Govt. of India, New Delhi and Others

Courts on Its Own Motion Vs State of Maharashtra, in the Ministry of Revenue and Forest, through Its Secretary, Mumbai and Othe

Krishna Kumar Agrawal Vs Union of India, Thr. Ministry of Environment, New Delhi and Others

Dinesh Manohar Shedame Vs Union of India, through Its Secretary, Ministry of Mines, New Delhi and Others

Gangadhar Maroti Ghule Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Chandu Rajaram Tompe and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Prabhakar Rukhmanrao Kulthe Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shaikh Fayyaz Ahmed Aziz Ahmed Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sanju Narayan Wendole Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Suryakant Ramchandra Ujlamkar Vs the State of Mah and Ors.