VERY IMPORTANT POINT
There is no fundamental right to trade in liquor. The impugned notification issued by Delhi Administration under Punjab Excise Act, 1914 laying down terms and conditions for registration of different brands of Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) for supply within territory of Delhi during 2000-2001 and laying down Minimum Sales Figures (MSF), as a criteria of eligibility for grant of Licence in Form L-1 is not violative of Arts. 14 and 16 and question of violation of Art. 19(1)(g) does not arise.

JUDGMENT

Dr. A.S. Anand, CJI.-Whether impugned notification issued by Respondent No. 2 laying down terms and conditions for registration of different brands of Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) for supply within the territory of Delhi during 2000-2001 and laying down Minimum Sales Figures (MSF), as a criteria of eligibility for grant of licence in form L-1, is violative of Article 14, 16 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution, is the short question raised in this Writ Petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution.

2. The petitioner is a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 having its registered office in Sangli, Maharashtra. It is engated in the business of manufacture of IMFL and holds L-1 licence for supply of its various brands of liquor for vending within the territory of Delhi.

3. The trade and business of liquor in National Capital Territory of Delhi is governed by Punjab Excise Act, 1914 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) and the grant of licence for vending liquor is regulated by Delhi Liquor Licence Rules, 1976 (hereinafter "the Rules"). Respondent No. 1 - Delhi Administration in exercise of its powers under Section 5 of the Act has been taking policy decisions from time to time and issuing notifications dealing with Registration of Brands and Eligibility of Brands of IMFL for its sale in the National Capital Territory of Delhi. The eligibility for grant of licence L-1, which enables the supplier to supply his brands of IMFL in Delhi, is regulated by those policy decisions and includes compliance with specific MSF requirements for a particular year. According to the petitioner, the policy of Delhi Government pursuant to which impugned notification, laying down MSF criteria for the year 2000-2001 has been issued, is arbitrary and discriminatory as against small scale manufacturers and has no nexus with the object of providing liquor of good quality for consumption within the territory of Delhi and is as such violative of Articles 14, 16 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution and, thus, liable to be declared invalid and unconstitutional.

4. Before we proceed to examine the challenge to the policy of Delhi Government, on the basis of which the impugned notification laying down MSF requirements for supply of various brands of liquor in Delhi has been issued, we may first refer in short to the previous history of the case.

5. In 1996 the petitioner filed Civil Writ Petition No. 483/1996 challenging MSF requirements fixed for that year. Rule nisi came to be issued. That petition has remained pending. Delhi Wine Merchants Association filed an SLP against an order of the Delhi High Court upholding MSF requirements through its judgment dated 25.4.1996 in Civil Writ Petition No. 4843 of 1995. That SLP is also pending. Both these cases pertain to the challenge to the notification issued for the period 1996-97. The present writ petition has put in issue the notification issued for the year 2000-2001 fixing enhanced MSF requirements as a condition of eligibility to get L-1 Licence. The grounds of challenge in all the three cases are similar.

6. Through the impugned notification MSF requirement for the lowest price tag has been raised from 60,000 cases (7.2. lac bottles) to 75,000 cases (9 lac bottles) over the previous year s MSF requirements for the lowest price tag brand of liquor and this raise, according to the petitioner is unfair, unreasonable, arbitrary and violative of Articles 19(1)(g) and 14 of the Constitution.

7. Let us first examine some of the statutory provisions dealing with the issue. Respondent No. 1 is expowered by Section 5 of the Act to issue notifications laying down maximum/minimum quantity of any intoxicating liquor which may be sold either in retail or in wholesale in the territory of Delhi. Section 5 provides:

"5. Powerof the Lieutenant Governor to declare limit of sale by retail and by whole sale.-The Lieutenant Governor of Delhi may by notification declare, with res