AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Order dated 9.1.2018, inadvertently records the presence of Mr.B.C. Negi, learned Senior Counsel and Mr. P.P. Singh, learned counsel,
appearing for the petitioners, whereas they were earlier appearing for respondent No.4 along with Ms. Leena Guleria, Advocate. Record is
corrected accordingly.
Heard.
Writ petitioners approached this Court alleging that private respondents had opened up their liquor vend in violation of the liquor policy and
also, the directions issued by the Hon''ble Supreme Court of India and this Court from time to time. Also, despite the matter having been brought
to the notice of the authorities, more specifically respondent No.3, no action was being taken for the reason that the private respondents are
influential persons.
The respondents refuted the averments made in the petition clarifying that the liquor vend is being run strictly in accordance with law. Also, we
notice from the affidavit dated 6.11.2017, that of the Deputy Commissioner, Shimla that liquor vend is not within the zone of restriction laid down
in the liquor policy.
Only to satisfy ourselves about there being any violation of the orders passed by the Apex Court in Writ petition(s) (Civil) No(s). 230 /2001,
titled as M.K. Balakrishnan and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors., we had directed the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rampur Bushahr,
District Shimla, to visit the spot for ascertaining the factual position.
From the report submitted by the said officer, we are satisfied that the liquor vend concerned, which is at a distance of 220 meters from the
school, is being run strictly in accordance with law,.
It may be that persons visiting the liquor vend may be a source of nuisance in the neighbourhood, but then such fact remains un-established from
the record. Allegations of Mahila Mandal pertaining to the nuisance are vague, unspecific and unsubstantiated in terms of time and place.
As such, without adverting to this issue, we close the present proceedings, leaving it open for the residents of the area to initiate appropriate
proceedings, if so required and desired under the various laws of the land in the event of there being any nuisance to the residents.
It is seen that the Deputy Commissioner, Shimla, had closed the liquor vend, more so, for the reason that this Court was seized of the present
matter. Since we are disposing of the matter, we direct the Deputy Commissioner, to ensure that the liquor vend is allowed to be opened forthwith.
In view of the aforesaid, petition st ands disposed of, so also pending application(s), if any.