STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS. ETC. versus MC. DOWELL & CO. AND ORS. ETC.

Citation: [1996] 3 S.C.R. 721 · Decided: 21-03-1996 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.M. AHMADI · Disposal: Disposed off
Cited by 19 judgment(s) · cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

• 
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS. ETC. 
v. 
MC. DOWELL & CO. AND ORS. ETC. 
MARCH 21, 1996 
[AM. AHMADI, CJ, B.P. JEEV AN REDDY AND 
SUHAS C. SEN, JJ.] 
Andhra Pradesh Prohibition Act, 1995 (as amended by Andhra Pradesh 
Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 1995). 
A 
B 
Ss. 2(7)(a) and (b), 7, 7-A, 15(1)-/ntoxicating liquor~rohibition of C 
manufacntre, production, sale, consumption and possession of-Held, con-
stitutionally valid-Retrospective operatio11 to amending Act w.e.f date of 
commencement of Pri11cipal Act is valid. 
Constillttio11 ·of !11dia. 
A1ticles 14, 19(1)(g), 19(6), 47, 24fr-7th Schedule (Entry 8 read with 
Entry 6 and Entry 24 of List II and Enfly 52 of List !)--Intoxicating li-
quors--!'Janufacture, production, conszunption, sale and possession 
of-Prohibition of by Andhra Pradesh Prohibitio11 Act, 1995-He/d intoxicat-
D 
i11g liquors fall under Entry 8 of list II, and State Legislalltre is competent to E 
enact law on the subject-Entry 52 of List I does not impinge upon Entry 8 
of List II-A citizen has no right to trade in intoxicating liquors-Act is not 
violative of Article 14-Grounds on which an enactment ca1i be st1uck 
down-Explained . 
Doct1ine of 'pith and substance'-Applicability of 
F 
Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951 : Schedule 1, Item 
26--Fennentation Industries-Prohibition of manufacture of intoxicating li-
quors by State Legislantre-Held, the item must be read subject to Entry 8 
and EntJy 6 in List II of 7th Schedule to the Constitution-State Legislature G 
has power to make law in order to prohibit manufacture, production con-
sumption, sale and possession of intoxicating liquor. 
The manufacturers of intoxicating liquors, whose licences the 
Government of Andhra Pradesh refused to renew after the enforcement of 
the Andhra Pradesh prohibition Act, 1995, filed writ petitions before the H 
721 
722 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(1996] 3 S.C.R. 
A High Court challenging the provisions of the Act and seeking a declaration 
that the Act did not prohibit manufacture of intoxicating liquors though 
it prohibited consumption, sale and possession thereof in the State. A Full 
Bench of the High Court allowed the writ petition. Aggrieved, the State 
Government filed the appeals. 
B 
c 
D 
Meanwhile the Andhra Pradesh Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 1995 
was enacted prohibiting manufacture also of intoxicating liquors in the 
State with effect from 16.1.1995, the date of commencement of the Principal 
Act. The manufacturers tiled the present writ petitions challenging the 
constitutional validity of the amending Act. 
It was contended for the petitioner that by virtue of enactment of the 
Industries (Development and Regulation) Act 1951, and inclusion of fer-
mentation industries (alcohol being a product of fermentation industries) 
in the Schedule to the Act, the State Legislature was denuded of its power 
to licence and regulate the manufacture of liquor and, as such, prohibiting 
the manufacture of liquor within the State was beyond the competence of 
the State Legislature; and that the Act was violative of Article 19(1) (g) of 
the Constitution as it infringed the right to trade in intoxicating liquors. 
The Act was also challenged as violative of Article 14 since it exempted 
certain categories of consumers of intoxicating liquors like foreigners, 
E members of armed forces serving or retired etc. 
Dismissing the writ petitions and disposing of the appeals, this 
Court 
' 
I 
HELD: 1. The prohibition of manufacture, production, consumption, 
). 
F 
sale and possession of intoxicating liquors brought about by the Andhra 
Pradesh Prohibition Act, 1995 (as amended by the Andhra Pradesh Act 35 
of 1995) is perfectly valid and beyond challenge. The retrospective effect 
given to the amending Act with effect from the date of commencement of the 
principal Act is constitutionally valid. (751-E; 756-C] 
G 
2.1. The power to make a law with respect to manufacture and produc-
tion of intoxicating liquors and its prohibition (among other matters men-
tioned In Entry 8 In List-II of 7th Schedule to the Constitution) belongs 
exclusively to the State Legislatures. Item 26 in the First Schedule to the 
Industries Development and Regulation Act, 1951 must be read subject to 
H Entry8 -and for that matter, Entry6 -in List-II. So read, the said item does 
-
STATEv. MC. DOWELL 
723 
not and cannot deal with manufacture, production or with prohibition of A 
manufacture and production of intoxicating
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.