Above :Punjab has become the first state to take the legislative route to dodge the Supreme Court verdict allowing hotels, restaurants and clubs situated within 500m of highways to serve alcohol. Photo: teabuddywordpress.com
States are finding various ways to circumvent the apex court ruling on liquor vends. Punjab amended its Excise Act by saying it was “to secure livelihood” of a large segment of the population
~By Vipin Pubby in Chandigarh
After the Supreme Court ruling in December last year which forbade the sale of liquor within 500m of highways, hundreds of such vends and bars had to move away. The Court’s decision was challenged but no stay was granted. In the meantime, several states and Union Territories circumvented the directive by changing the nomenclature of some roads from state highways to state or district roads.
Punjab was among the first to re-designate several state highways by issuing notifications. Subsequently, others followed suit, including UP, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Haryana and Himachal Pradesh. This effectively annulled the apex court directive to a large extent.
And now Punjab has become the first state to take the legislative route to circumvent the Supreme Court verdict. The Congress government of Capt Amarinder Singh last week amended the Punjab Excise Act allowing hotels, restaurants and clubs situated within 500m of highways to serve alcohol. The amendment, however, does not cover the opening of liquor vends within 500m of highways. However, NGO ArriveSafe challenged this amendment passed by the Punjab Vidhan Sabha on June 22 in the High Court. The HC issued a notice of Motion for July 24 but did not grant a stay on its operation.
The earlier re-designation trend started after the Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed a petition challenging the decision of the Union Territory of Chandigarh to change the nomenclature of roads dividing its sectors. The problem faced by Chandigarh was peculiar. It is spread in an area of 64 sqkm and is divided into sectors. Each sector is 1,200m by 800m intersected by roads. Almost all of them were designated as “State Highways” way back in 2005 evidently to secure maintenance grants from the centre.
In Chandigarh, almost all markets in various sectors came within the 500m limit. It therefore issued a notification to name the state highways “major district roads”.
As all the markets in various sectors came within the 500m limit imposed by the Supreme Court, the Chandigarh Administration was left in a quandary. No less than 84 of the 99 liquor vends had to be closed or shifted. Besides, a large number of bars and pubs faced closure. These included those in 5-star hotels and clubs. It, therefore, issued a notification to change the nomenclature of these roads from state highways to “major district roads.” Harman Sidhu of NGO ArriveSafe, on whose petition the Supreme Court had issued the directive, challenged the UT notification in the High Court, which subsequently dismissed his petition.
Gutsy campaigner
Wheelchair-bound since the age of 26, Harman Singh Sidhu has devoted his life to spreading the message of safety to road users. His NGO, ArriveSafe, has taken several initiatives with the Chandigarh Police to inculcate the habit of safe driving, including the use of helmets for two-wheeler drivers, safety belts for car users, campaign against the use of full beam and drunken driving.
Harman sustained a spinal injury in a road accident which paralysed the lower part of his body. The vehicle he was travelling in had rolled down a gorge. He says he was shocked to learn about the high rate of deaths in road accidents. As per official figures, at least one person is killed in India every four minutes.
Though Harman was not injured in an accident involving drunk driving, and he himself loves his drink, he points out that a large number of accidents are caused due this reason. It was his petition, first before the Punjab and Haryana High Court and then the Supreme Court, that led to the ban on sale of liquor within 500m of highways.
Meanwhile, following a nod from the Punjab cabinet on June 19, the assembly amended Section 26-A of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914, “to secure livelihood” of a large segment of the population. The explanatory note with the aims and objects of the draft amendment said that the bill “aims to ensure that hotels, restaurants, clubs and other notified places are allowed to serve alcohol only for consumption within their premises to secure the livelihood of a large segment of the state’s population.”
It said that hotels and restaurants were part of the hospitality and tourism industry “which generates substantial employment in the state” and that “absence of liquor in hotels, restaurants and clubs etc has seriously affected their existence and even their partial closure may create substantial unemployment in the state.” The bill is awaiting clearance by the governor.
By another notification earlier, Punjab had allowed marriage “palaces” (halls) to serve liquor during parties and wedding ceremonies. Punjabis are well-known for their fondness for drinks and there was a hue and cry over the ban on serving liquor in marriage “palaces” which are generally located near highways. The government had taken the plea that liquor was not sold at marriages and therefore, it did not come under the ambit of the directive issued by the Supreme Court.
As per information procured under the RTI Act, the number of liquor vends in Punjab has increased from 5,632 in 2005-06 to 12,000 in 2016-17. During this period, the Punjab Excise Department’s target revenue also went up nearly four times—from Rs 1,506 crore in 2005-06 to Rs 5,440 crore in 2016-2017. There was an annual 10.8 percent increase in the projected revenue set by the state from 2005-06 to 2016-17.
However, the revenue plummeted to less than Rs 2,000 crore this year and there were few takers for licenses in view of the norms fixed by the Supreme Court. The amendment would now pave the way for re-auction of the vends. Although the amendment to the Excise Act would now be cited as a precedent by other states as well, Sidhu plans to challenge it as soon as the Punjab governor gives his nod to the amendment bill.
Given the mounting opposition by states, the Supreme Court may have to do some re-thinking on its directive.