Allahabad HC Allows PIL Filed By LKG Student To Restrain Renewal Of Licence To Liquor Shop Near School Premises
The Allahabad High Court allowed a PIL filed by a Kindergarten student to restrain the renewal of a licence to a liquor shop near his school premises.
The Bench noted the provisions of Rule 5 (4) (a) of the Uttar Pradesh Number and Location of Excise Shops Rules, 1968 (Rules of 1968) which provides for a distance of 50 metres of a liquor shop from any place of public worship, school, hospital or residential colony. It clearly provided that if a school came into existence subsequent to the establishment of a liquor shop, then the provisions of this rule would not apply.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Vikas Budhwar observed, “The mere fact that the shop has been used as a liquor shop in a financial year prior to the school came into existence, is not sufficient for invoking the proviso for the purpose of granting licence year after year inasmuch as the licence is issued to the licencee on his fulfilling the eligibility under Rule 8 of the Rules of 2002 and not to the shop in question. Any other interpretation to the said proviso, as projected by counsel for the respondents, would render the provisions of Rule 5 (4) (a) nugatory.”
Advocate Ashutosh Sharma represented the petitioner, while SC Ramanand Pandey appeared for the respondents.
An L.K.G. student (minor) filed a PIL through his guardian seeking the removal of a country liquor shop located next to his school premises in Kanpur and prayed before the Court to not grant any fresh/renewal of licence for the year 2024-25.
The PIL underlined that the liquor shop was less than 30 meters from the school and yet remained open throughout the day as it was an infamous meeting place for “anti-social elements.”
After the father of the minor made a complaint on the IGRS portal, a report was prepared admitting the location of the liquor shop as 20-30 meters away from the school but still no action was taken on the ground that the liquor shop was older than the school. Another report indicated that the shop had been running for more than 30 years and the school was established in the year 2019.
The Court perused the provisions of Rule 5 (4) (a) of the Rules of 1968 and Rule 8 (d) (i) of the Uttar Pradesh Excise (Settlement of Licenses for Retail Sale of Country Liquor) Rules, 2002 ( Rules of 2002) and stated that “every applicant who applies for licence of a retail country liquor shop, is required to furnish an affidavit that he possesses or has an arrangement for taking on rent a suitable premise in that locality for running the shop in accordance with the provisions of Rules of 1968 as amended from time to time.”
“The proviso to Rule 5 (4) (a) of the Rules of 1968 would have application only for the financial year in which licence has already been granted and the place of worship or school or hospital or residential colony comes into existence inasmuch as for seeking licence in the next financial year, the applicant has to comply with the provisions of Rule 5 (4) (a) of the Rules of 1968,” the Court explained.
Consequently, the Court restrained the respondents from granting/renewing the licence qua the shop in question after the expiry of the present licence for the financial year 2025-26 onwards.
Accordingly, the High Court partly allowed the writ petition.
Cause Title: Master Atharva Minor v. State of UP & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024:AHC:80334-DB)
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocates Ashutosh Sharma and Nitesh Kumar Jauhari
Respondents: SC Ramanand Pandey and Seema Agarwal; Advocate Sanjay Kr. Srivastava
