HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR

AT JAMMU

OWP no.822/2005

Date of decision:06.02.2017

With MP nos. 330/2011, 1586/2011, 1834/2011, 1854/2011, 395/2012, 428/2012, 431/2012, 505/2012, 1682/2012,

1920/2012, 2301/2012, 2311/2012, 2395/2012, 2477/2012, 633/2013, 2/2016, 3/2016, 4/2016, 7/2016, 8/2016, 9/2016, 10/2016.

OWP no. 524/2005 with MP no.684/2005;

OWP no.536/2005 with MP no.703/2005;

OWP no. 802/2005 with MP no.371/2008;

OWP no.817/2005 with MP no.376/2008;

OWP no.826/2005 with MP nos. 329/2008, 379/2008 & 427/2012;

OWP no.827/2005 with MP no. 216/2007, 319/2008, 373/2008, 396/2012, 512/2012;

OWP no.835/2005 with MP nos. 271/2007, 318/2008, 372/2008, 361/2011, 397/2012;

OWP no.326/2006 with MP no.422/2006;

OWP no. 972/2006 with MP no.1322/2006; and

OWP no.137/2010 with MP no.171/2010.

i)

Sandya Devi & ors.

v

State of J&K & ors.

ii)

Kaka Ram.

v

State of J&K & ors.

iii)

Ekta Devi.

v

State of J&K & ors.

iv)

Sandya Devi & ors.

v

State of J&K & ors.

v)

Ved Kumari & ors.

v

State of J&K & ors.

vi)

Manish Mahajan.

v

State of J&K & ors.

vii)

Abdul Majid & ors.

v

State of J&K & ors.

viii)

Namrata Kotwal.

v

State of J&K & ors.

ix)

Sanjay Khanna & ors

v

State of J&K & ors.

x)

Sandya Devi & ors.

v

State of J&K & ors.

xi)

Ganesh Kumar Sharma & ors.v

State of J&K & ors.

Coram:

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey, Judge

Appearing counsel:

For Petitioners:

Mr. Z. A. Shah, Sr. Advocate, with

Mr. Vipin Gandotra, Advocate;

Mr. R. K. Gupta, Sr. Advocate, with

Mr. Riteesh Mahajan, adv

Mr. Abhinav Sharma, Advocate;

Mr. S. K. Shukla, Advocate.

For official Respondents: Mr. J. I. Ganai, Advocate General, with

.

Mr. Ehsan Mirza, Dy. AG; and

Mr. Faraz Iqbal, Dy. AG;

For private Respondents: Mr. Pranav Kohli, Ms. Meenakshi Salathia, Mr. Sachin Dogra,

Mr. W. S. Nargal, Mr. Ravi Abrol, Mohd Shaqir Hussain and

Mr. C. S. Azad, Advocates.

Whether approved for reporting:

Yes

1.

These eleven writ petitions relate to licences for retail sale of Indian

Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL), popularly termed as JKEL-2 license, and I

wish to commence this judgment recording my conviction about the

2

universal truth that gross loss of unimaginable magnitude in intoxicants

overweighs the little benefits in them, and that there cannot be any good in

something that covers minds, induces ruin in the biological beings and

economy of a people, and reduces most of the consumers to abject penury.

2.

In four of these petitions – OWP nos.822/2005, 826/2005, 827/2005

& 835/2005 – the petitioners challenge communications dated 14.12.2005,

styled as ‘notice for cancellation of temporary licence’ addressed to them

by the Excise Commissioner; in the other four writ petitions – OWP nos.

802/2005, 817/2005, 972/2006 and 137/2010 – mostly, the very same

petitioners seek, inter alia, regularisation of the temporary licenses issued

in their favour by the competent authority by draw of lots after they were

subjected to the procedure formulated by the respondents; in writ petition,

OWP no.326/2006, the petitioner has challenged Government order

no.668-STS of 2005 dated 30.12.2005 insofar as the same directs opening

of sub-vends at Palma Mendhar, Gujroo, Nagrota, and, at the same time,

has raised his grievance against grant of licenses in favour of the private

respondents 3 to 5 therein for sale of liquor as a sub-vendees and prayed

or issue of command to the respondents to allot the sub-vends in his

favour; in OWP no.536/2005, the petitioner therein is aggrieved of an

order issued by Excise Commissioner debarring the petitioner – a women

of 45 years of age – from obtaining the off-license for retail sale of IMFL;

in OWP no.5