B.SUBHASHAN REDDY, D.MURUGESAN
State of Tamil Nadu – Appellant
Versus
K. Vinayagamurthy – Respondent
B. Subhashan Reddy, CJ.
1. The constitutionality of Governmental Orders contained in G.O. Ms. Nos.128, 129 and 130 Prohibition and Excise (VI) Department, dated 8.7.2002 has been assailed in this batch of writ petitions. Of course, there is a Writ Appeal filed against the interim order passed in W.P.M.P. No.34563 of 2002 in W.P. No.25181 of 2002. But the said Writ Appeal gets disposed of in view of the disposal of these writ petitions themselves.
2. We refer all the writ petitioners as the petitioners; the State Government as the Government; the Commissioner of Excise as the Commissioner and the District Collector as the Collector.
3. The petitioners are the licensees of retail outlets set up pursuant to the licences issued during the last excise year 2001 - 2002. The excise year commenced on 1.8.2001 and expires on 31.7.2002. While the wholesale distribution is controlled by the State through the Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation, which supplies the Indian Made Foreign Liquor to the retailers like the petitioners, the retailers, including the petitioners, sell the same at the licensed premises. Privilege to vend the liquor in retail was being granted pursuant to Ru
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.