HC: Consider plea of Aurangabad village women to shut liquor shop

The Aurangabad bench of the Bombay high court (HC) has directed the tehsildar of a village in the district, to re-hear the representation of a group of women seeking

The Aurangabad bench of the Bombay high court (HC) has directed the tehsildar of a village in the district, to re-hear the representation of a group of women seeking the closure of a liquor shop. The women’s petition is based on a policy wherein, if 25% of the women of a community want an alcohol shop closed, it would be mandatory for the authorities to shut it down.

In its ruling, the HC noted that the state government was practicing “quaint Gandhiana” by collecting large amounts in taxes on alcohol on one hand, while coming out with policies to target the evils of alcohol, on the other.

The division bench of chief justice Pradeep Nandrajog and justice RG Avachat, while hearing the public interest litigation (PIL) filed by Sachin Bhairavkar on September 24, was informed by senior counsel Satish Talekar and Ajinkya Kale that the around 50% of the women from Savalvihar village had submitted a representation to the tehsildar in 2011 to shut down a liquor shop as it was causing a nuisance.

The petitioner submitted that the state has a policy empowering women to prohibit the sale of alcohol in their village if 50% of the adult women resolve that the liquor vent be closed. It has to be proceeded by 25% of the women moving the resolution.

The petitioner informed the court that as per the census, there were 2,322 women in the village, 716 of whom had signed the representation. The authorities, however, had failed to take any action.

On its part, the excise department submitted that on verification of the signatures, it came to light that 280 women had been misguided into signing the representation, while 265 denied having signed it. The department further submitted that four of the signatories were dead and 11 signatures were forged. In light of these findings, no action was taken against the liquor shop. The petitioner, however, disputed the claims.

After hearing the submissions, the bench said, “We are in the year 2019 today. 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 tehsildar in-charge of the revenue estate of the village.” The court directed the tehsildar to convene the process as per the policy and disposed of the petition.

The bench concluded, saying, “On the one hand, huge revenues are generated by levying excise and additional duties on alcohol, simultaneously, the state professes to eradicate the evil of alcohol. Quaint Gandhiana!”