A bar license cannot be revoked without clear evidence of the owner's responsibility for incidents; administrative discretion must align with justifiable grounds.

ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 1 to 3 and learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the fourth respondent.

2. The petitioner, apprehending closure of the Bar licence issued to the petitioner pursuant to an auction held during December 2023, is before this Court.

3. It is the specific case of the petitioner that the sitting MLA of the Constituency, Killiyur, Kanniyakumari had earlier given a representation for cancelling the Bar licence issued to the petitioner, which is valid for a period starting from 15.12.2022 to 31.12.2025.

4. It is submitted that the Joint Director, TASMAC in his proceedings bearing reference in Na.Ka.No.A4/0014/2024 dated 07.03.2024, in response to the representation dated 03.01.2024, rejected the request of the aforesaid sitting MLA.

5. It is submitted that thereafter, the said sitting MLA has escalated the issue by holding protest. It appears that the Law Enforcement Authority namely, Police and Investigation Department intervened and prevented public disturbances and thereafter an FIR came to be registered in Crime No.78 of 2024 dated 09.03.2024, before the Police Station, Kaviyakkavilai.

6. In this regard, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 1 to 3 submits that the Bar, in the said premises, has been in existence for 9 years and that no untoward incident has taken place.

7. The learned counsel for the fourth respondent would submit that an incident has taken place inside the Bar on 31.12.2023 and an FIR has been registered in Crime No.316 of 2023 dated 31.12.2023 before the Police Station, Kavikkavilai recorded offences under Sections 294b, 302 of IPC. It is further submitted that there are no other cases pending against the petitioner.

8. The apprehension expressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner is misplaced as the petitioner is carrying on the business as a Bar licencee pursuant to the auction that was held by the TASMAC. The alleged murder, which was taken place on 31.12.2023 is a social malice, which needs to be addressed at a macro level. Merely, because an untoward incident had taken place within the Bar, ipso facto would not warrant the closure of the Bar run by the petitioner, unless the petitioner himself was responsible for the same. If necessary evidence and material have been recovered and the Bar was sanitized, it cannot be ordered to close.

9. Since tipplers may be prone to violence due to intoxication and there are potential threat for such untoward incidents, it is for the TASMAC to deploy the adequate number of police force or security staffs, to deter tipplers to resort to violence and to control the crowd.

10.This Writ Petition is thereafter disposed of by directing the respondents to not to close the licenced Bar of the petitioner. The TASMAC Authorities/respondents 1 to 3 are directed to ensure that adequate number of security staffs are deployed in each of the Bars so that there is deterrence among the tipplers from resorting to any violence, which may result any untoward loss of precious life. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Index : Yes / No 29.07.2024 Internet : Yes / No apd To The Inspector of Police, Kaliyakkavilai Police Station, Kaliyakkavilai, Kanyakumari District.

C.SARAVANAN, J.

apd

29.07.2024