SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1983 Supreme(Mad) 442

RAMANUJAM
C. Vadiappan – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Tamil Nadu, Represented By Its Commissioner And Secretary, Prohibition And Excise Department – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Ramanujam, J.

1. In all these writ petitions, the petitioners have challenged the constitutional validity of the Tamil Nadu Ordinance IV of 1983 which seeks to amend the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 3937 in certain respects.

2. All the petitioners herein are persons who had been granted the privilege of supplying by wholesale arrack or liquor under Section 17-C of the Prohibition Act read with Rule 6 of the Tamil Nadu Arrack (Supply by Wholesale) Rules, 1981 from 16th July, 1981 till 31st March, 1983. They had applied for renewal of their licences in time. Since no orders had been passed on their applications for renewal, the period of their licences should be deemed to have been extended for a period of two months from the date of expiry, i. e., till 31st May, 1983.

3. At that stage, the Tamil Nadu Ordinance IV of 1983 was promulgated by the Governor on 27th May, 1983 amending Section 17-C by inserting a Sub-section (1-A) and also inserting a new section, namely, Section 22-B in the Prohibition Act. Section 17-C as it stood before the amendment, enabled the State Government to grant to any person or persons on such conditions and for such period as may be prescribed the exclus











Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top