The interpretation of the term 'place of public resort' under Rule 5 of the 1968 Rules was central to the court's decision.

Ramesh Ranganathan, J.

This writ petition is filed in Public Interest seeking a mandamus commanding the respondent authority to cancel the F.L.-7/liquor bar licence issued in favour of respondent no.10.

2. The petitioner’s complaint in this writ petition is that a license was granted, for establishing the F.L. shop, even though it is located within 100 meters distance of certain institutions stipulated in the Rule.

3. A Division Bench of this Court had, by its order in WPPIL No. 216 of 2018 dated 14.11.2018, requested the eighth respondent to depute a responsible officer to have the distance between the subject bar and the Government offices, Tehsil and SDM office measured, and to submit a report. The report submitted to this Court discloses that, while the bar is located at a distance of more than 100 meters from all other institutions, the only public institution which falls within a radius of 100 meters, is a branch of the State Bank of India which is located at a distance of 11 meters from the subject bar.

4. The stand of the State Government, as put forth by Shri S. S. Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General, is that, while the bar was established in the year 2015, the branch of the State Bank of India was established only thereafter in the year 2017; and a Bank or its branch do not fall within those institutions, within 100 meters radius of which establishment of a bar is prohibited.

5. Rule 5 of the 1968 Rules stipulates that the principles prescribed therein shall be observed in determining the location and the sites for shops. Clause (4) thereunder stipulates that no new shop or sub-shop shall be licensed in close proximity to a place of public resort, school, hospital, place of worship or factory, or to the entrance to a bazaar or a residential colony.

6. The only question which would necessitate examination is whether the branch of the State Bank of India would fall within the ambit of the words “place of public resort”, for it is evident that it would not fall within the scope of any of the other places specified in Clause (4) of Rule 5. The concise Oxford English dictionary defines “resort” as a place frequented for holidays or recreation. A public resort can only mean a public place frequented for holidays or recreation. The branch of a Bank would, undoubtedly, not fall within its ambit. It is evident, therefore, that establishment of the bar in the subject location does not fall foul of Rule 5 of the 1968 Rules. The contention to the contrary, in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, does not merit acceptance. The writ petition fails, and is dismissed accordingly. No costs.