Delhi govt says facing a ‘full-scale assault’ over new excise rules

A bench of chief justice DN Patel and justice Jyoti Singh, while hearing a plea against the new policy, were informed by senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi that most of the apprehensions raised in several writ petitions were “fanciful”.

The state government on Thursday told the Delhi high court that it is under a “full-scale assault” for its new excise policy, which was made public earlier this month, and aims to introduce sweeping changes in the city’s liquor business, clean up malpractices, and improve user experience.

BJP leader Pravesh Sahib Singh Verma also moved the high court on Thursday challenging the home delivery of liquor in the national capital along with several other petitions against the Delhi government. (HT Archive)

A bench of chief justice DN Patel and justice Jyoti Singh, while hearing a plea against the new policy, were informed by senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi that most of the apprehensions raised in several writ petitions were “fanciful”.

“There is a full-scale assault on us [the Delhi government] by filing writ petitions… We are plugging the leaks, minimising corruption and also giving enough and fair competition. There have been eight more writ petitions since the court heard the first petition in this regard,” Singhvi told the court.

He said the pleas have been filed by people who are “well-versed” with the liquor trade and are now acting “innocent”.

The court did not pass any order on the plea by Ashiana Towers and Promoters Private Limited and Rajiv Motors Private Limited, who alleged that the policy is illegal, unfair, arbitrary and in violation of the Delhi Excise Act of 2009.

Advocate Sanyam Khetarpal, appearing for the two companies, said the rules divide the city into 32 zones but allow only 16 players in the market, thus “creating a monopoly”.

To this the bench said, “Control is for public welfare and not for you to run your business. It is for the public at large. It is not meant for you to run your business or put you in difficulty.”

The court also issued notice to and sought a reply from the Delhi government on a petition by Anita Chaudhary, who holds a wholesale liquor licence in Uttar Pradesh.

Advocate Sanchar Anand, appearing for Chaudhary, argued that the policy is beyond the state government’s rule-making powers under the Delhi Excise Act and violates Article 14 of the Constitution.

Meanwhile, BJP leader Pravesh Sahib Singh Verma also moved the high court on Thursday challenging the home delivery of liquor in the national capital, claiming that the policy suffers from many infirmities as it fails to take into account ground realities, practical implications and implications such as a potential increase in cases of domestic violence.

The bench first issued a notice, but later withdrew its order when they saw that Verma had added Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) in the memo of parties.

The bench posted the matter for hearing on August 6.

Verma’s counsel Balaji Srinivasan said they added AAP in the plea because the party, during the elections, promised they would reduce the price of liquor.