ANUJ GARG & ORS. versus HOTEL ASSOCIATION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: [2007] 12 S.C.R. 991 · Decided: 06-12-2007 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.B. SINHA · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 24 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

' ' 
J., 
ANUJ GARG & ORS. 
v. 
HOTEL ASSOCIATION OF INDIA & ORS. 
DECEMBER 6, 2007 
[S.B. SINHA AND HARJIT SINGH BEDI, JJ.] 
Constitution of India, 1950; Articles 14, 15, 16, 19(1)(g) and 3721 
Punjab Excise Act, 1914; S.30: 
Right to employment-Prohibition in employment--S.30 of the 
A 
B 
c 
Act prohibiting employment of men under 25 years of age and women 
in any premises where liquor/intoxicating drug is being served-
Constitutionality of-Held: High Court rightly held s.30 of the Act 
ultra viresArticles 14, 15and19(1)(g) of the Constitution-1914 Act 
is a pre-constitutional legislation-Changed social psyche and .D 
expectations with time are important factors to be considered in the 
upkeep of law-When the Act was enacted, concept of equality 
between two sexes was unknown-However, with the framing of 
articles 14 and 15, the constitution makers intended to apply equality 
amongst two sexes in all spheres of life-Impugned provisions provide E 
for wide restriction by prohibiting employment of men and women 
below 25 years of age in any premises where liquor is served-Thereby 
young graduates of Hotel management Course would be deprived of 
their right to employment without any rational criteria to justifo such 
prohibition-Instead of putting restrictions on women's freedom, F 
empowerment in the law enforcement strategies would be more tenable 
and socially wise approach~It is for the Court to review that the 
majoritarian impulse rooted in moralistic tradition do not impinge 
upon individual autonomy-Impugned legislation with pronounced 
protective legislation suffers from incurable fixation of stereotyped G 
morality and conception of sexual role-Thus, outmoded in content 
and stiffing in means-Personal freedom is a fundamental tenet which 
could not be compromised in the name of expediency until and unless 
there is compelling State purpose-Only on a pre-supposition of 
991 
H 
)-. 
992 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2007] 12 S.C.R. 
A happening of some incident, a law cannot be declared intra vires which 
is ex facie ultra vires-Thus, no injirmityfound in the decision of the 
High Court holding the impugned Section 30 of the Act ultra vires 
Articles 14, 15 & 19(1 )(g)-Right to equality--Right to employment-
Judicial review. 
B 
Doctrines: 
) 
Doctrines of "Res Extra Commercium Issue" and "Parens 
,. 
Patriae Power of State "-Applicability of 
c 
Judicial deprecation-Held: Practice of raising a contention 
before Supreme Court which not only had not been raised before the 
High Court but in an appeal filed by others maintainability whereof is 
in question is deprecated 
Words and Phrases: 
D 
'Justice discourse 'and 'Privacy rights '-Meaning of 
} 
The first respondent with four others filed a writ petition before 
the Delhi High Court questioning the validity of the provision under 
Section 30 of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914. The High Court declared 
E Section 30 of the Act ultra vires Articles 19(1)(g), 14 and 15 of the 
Constitution oflndia to the extent it prohibits employment of any 
men/woman in any part of such premises, in which liquor or 
intoxicating drugs are consumed by the public. Hence, the present 
appeals. 
-
F 
Appellants contended that as nobody has any fundamental right 
~ 
to deal in liquor, being 'res extra commercium', the State had the 
right to make a law and/or continue the old law imposing reasonable 
restrictions on the nature of employment therein. 
G 
Dismissing C.A.No.5657 of2007 and allowing C.A.No.5658 of 
2007, the Court 
HELD: 1.1. Punjab Excise Act, 1914 is a pre-constitutional 
'-, 
legislation. Although it is saved in terms of Article 372 of the 
Constitution, challenge to its validity on the touchstone of Articles 
H 
ANUJGARG v. HOTEL ASSOCIATION OF INDIA 
993 
-<} 
14, 15 and 19 of the Constitution oflndia, is permissible in law. 
A 
J. 
• 
1 
[Para 7) [1001-B] 
1.2. A statute although could have been held to be a valid piece 
oflegislation keeping in view the societal condition of those times, 
but with the changes occurring therein both in the domestic as also 
international arena, such a law can also be declared invalid. 
B 
[Para 7) (1001-B] 
John Vallamattom & Anr. v. Union of India, (2003) 6 SCC 611, 
relied on. 
United Nations Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, (1966), C 
referred to. 
1.3. Changed social psyche and expectations are important 
·ractors to be considered in the upkeep oflaw. Decision on relevance 
will be more often a function of time which is oper

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.