THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU REP. BY SEC. AND ORS. versus K. BALU AND ANR.

Citation: [2018] 1 S.C.R. 661 · Decided: 23-02-2018 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: DIPAK MISRA, AMITAVA ROY, D.Y. CHANDRACHUD · Disposal: Disposed off
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
661
THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU REP. BY SEC. AND ORS.
v.
K. BALU AND ANR.
(MA Nos 690-692/2017 and 369-371/2018)
In
(Civil Appeal Nos. 12164-12166 of 2016)
FEBRUARY 23, 2018
[DIPAK MISRA, CJI, AMITAVA ROY AND
DR. D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, JJ.]
Liquor – Sale of  – In the States of Mizoram and Assam  – In
order dated 31.3.2017, exemption was granted to the State of
Meghalaya and Sikkim from the application of the 500 meter distance
requirement provided in paragraph 24(v)(iii) of the judgment dated
15.12.2016 – This exemption was granted in view of the peculiar
topography of the States of Sikkim and Meghalaya – Subsequently,
the same exemption was granted to State of Arunachal Pradesh
also – In the instant applications, the State of Mizoram and Assam
sought similar exemption submitting that the hilly terrain of the State
necessiates the grant of the same exemption as was granted to the
State of Meghalaya and Sikkim – In view of the peculiar topography
of the State of Mizoram, the benefit of the exemption granted by the
earlier order dated 31.3.2017 is extended to the State of Mizoram –
As regards the State of Assam, the State was directed to file an
affidavit indicating ‘hilly areas’  or the districts which can be called
‘hill/hilly areas’ so that appropriate orders can be passed – In view
of the affidavit, benefit of order dated 31.3.2017 is extended to
districts of the State of Assam namely, Karbi Anglong, West Karbi
Anglong and Dima Hasao (North Cachar Hills) – MAs./IAs
accordingly disposed of.
State of Tamil Nadu v. K. Balu  (2017) 6  SCC 715 –
referred to.
Case Law Reference
(2017) 6 SCC 715
referred to
Para 1
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: MA Nos. 690-692/2017
and 369-371/2018 in Civil Appeal Nos. 12164-12166 of 2016.
661
[2018] 1 S.C.R. 661
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
662
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 1 S.C.R.
From the Judgment and Order dated 25.02.2013 and 28.03.2013
of the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Writ Petition No. 23773 of
2012, M. P. Nos. 9 and 10 of 2013 in Writ Petition No. 23773 of 2012.
Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Sr. Adv.,  Roy Abraham, Ms. Seema
Jain, Ms. Reena Roy, Himinder Lal, P.N. Goswami, Ms. Pranita Shekhar,
Pawan K. Sharma, Shashi Ranjan, Dharmendra Kumar Sinha, Dr. Manish
Singhvi, Satyendra Kumar, Shailja Nanda Mishra, Irshad Ahmad, Ashutosh
Dubey, Krishnendu Sarkar, Ms. Rajshri, Abhishek Chauhan, V. S. Rawat,
Sushil Pandey, Ms. Kuljit Kaur, Pragyan Pradip Sharma, Ms. Anandini
Kumari, P. V. Yogeswaran, R. B. Phookan, Ms. Neha Tandon, Shailesh
Madiyal, M. Yogesh Kanna, Yash Pal Dhingra, Ms. Nandini Sen
Mukherjee, Ajay Marwah, Irshad Ahmad, Advs. for the Appellants.
S.S. Shamshery, AAG, C. L. Pandey, Sr. Adv., Ms. Binu Tamta,
S.S. Rawat, Hemant Arya, G.S. Makker, Amit Sharma, Sandeep Singh,
Ankit Raj, Ms. Indira Bhakar, Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Manish Kaushik,
Ms. Ananya Pandey, Dipesh Sharma, Yash Pal Dhingra, G. Prakash,
Jishnu M. L., Mrs. Priyanka Prakash, Mrs. Beena Prakash, Vijay Shankar
V. L., S. Thananjayan, Kaleeswaram Raj, Suvidutt M.S., Ajay Marwah,
Advs. for the Respondents.
The following Order of the Court was delivered:
O R D E R
1. The States of Mizoram and Assam have filed the present MAs /
IAs, which emanate from the judgment of this Court in State of Tamil
Nadu v K Balu1. By an order dated 31 March 2017, this Court exempted
the States of Meghalaya and Sikkim from the application of the 500
meter distance requirement provided in paragraph 24(v)(iii) of the
judgment dated 15 December 2016. This exemption was granted in view
of the peculiar topography of the States of Sikkim and Meghalaya. The
relevant part of the order dated 31 March 2017 is extracted below :
“25. The third area is in relation to the States of Sikkim…
and Meghalaya which have moved this Court for a suitable
modification of the judgment having regard to the nature of the
hilly terrain. In relation to the State of Sikkim, this Court has been
apprised on behalf of the State Government that nearly 82 per
cent of the area of the state is forested and 92 per cent of the
 1 Civil Appeal 12164-12166/2016
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
663
shops will have to be closed as a result of the directions of this
Court. Similarly, the State of Meghalaya has placed before this
Court peculiar conditions prevailing in the State as a result of the
hilly terrain. We are of the view that insofar as the States of
Meghalaya and Sikkim are concerned, it would suffice if the two
states are exempted only from the application of the 500 metre
distance requirement pro
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.