The Gram Panchayat Landran vs The State of Punjab and Others

J.M. Tandon, J.—The abadis of villages Landran and Kailon both in Tehsil Kharar, District Ropar, are close to each other in 1984-85 there was a country liquor vend in Kailon at a distance of about 1/2 Kilometer from village Landran. This liquor vend has not been auctioned for the year 1985-86 and instead a liquor vend has been auctioned in village Landran at T-junction where the road from Sirhind meets Kharar Banur road. The vend in village Landran was auctioned on March 25, 1985, and the highest bid offered was of M/s. Chand Singh and compnay (respondent No. 4) for Rs. 5,70,000/-. The Gram Panchayat, Landran, has assailed the auction of country liquor vend for the year 1985-86 in Landran in the present writ.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner having passed resolution on 27th March 1985. (R. 2) that the country liquor vend be not opened in village Landran, the Government is estopped from running the country liquor vend in this village with effect from 1st April, 1985, in view of the provisions contained in section 26 of the Punjab Gram Pancnayat Act (hereafter the Act). The contention is without merit.

Section 26 (1) of the Act reads:

A Gram Panchayat, may by a resolution supported by at least two-third of Panches holding office for time being passed at anytime on or after the first day of April and on or before the 30th day of September in any year, direct that intoxicating liquor be not sold at any licensed shop within its Sabha area. Notwithstanding any resolution passed by an empowered local body u/s 5 of the Punjab Local Option Act, 1923, or any other Act for the time being in force, such resolution shall be effective from the first day of April of the year following the date when it is so passed and shall immediately be communicated to the Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Punjab.

It is not disputed that the Gram Panchayat did not pass the resolution and communicated the same to the Excise and Taxation Commissioner within the period specified in section 26(1). The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that as the country liquor vend is being started in village Landran for the first time, the Gram Panchayat can stop it by passing a resolution even beyond the period specified in section 26 (1). It is difficult to uphold this contention. The provisions contained in section 26(i) shall have to be followed for making a resolution effective irrespective that a country liquor vend is opened in a village for the first time or otherwise. The petitioner, therefore, cannot justifiably stop the running of country liquor vend in village Landran on the basis of the resolution dated March 27. 1985.

Another point argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the country liquor vend in village Landran is violative of Order 5 of the Punjab Intoxicants Liceuce and Sales Orders 1956 (hereafter the Orders). This contention is also without force. Order 5 reads:

No licence for the sale of liquor or drugs may be given unless either there is an ascertained demand for such liquor or drugs in the locality concerned, or it is granted to counteract the illicit supply of liquor or drugs in that locality, nor in the case of liquor licenses for an consumption without the inquiry prescribed by orders 8 to 15 of these orders.

The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the country liquor vend in village Landran is neither justified on the ground of ascertain demand nor to counteract the illicit supply of liquor in terms of Order 5. It is doubtful if it is open for the Gram Panchayat to assail the opening of a country liquor vend in village Landran on these grounds. The petitioner or anybody else is not required to be associated by the competent authority while ascertaining the demand for Liquor or to counteract its illicit supply in terms of Order 5 This part of the Order is in the nature of a guideline for the competent authority. This apart, the averment made in the written statement filed by the Excise and Taxation Officer, Ropar, is that the impugned country liquor vend has been opened as a result of detection of cases of illicit distillation, some of which have been detailed in the list Rule 1. In view of this averment, there is hardly any justification to conclude that the opening of the impugned country liquor vend in village Landran is liable to be stopped being violative of Order 5.

In the result, the writ petition fails and is dismissed with no order as to costs.