- News>
- States
Retail IMFL vendor files petition challenging govt ordinance
Chennai, Oct 27: A retail Indian made foreign liquor (IMFL) vendor today filed a petition in the Madras High Court, challenging the ordinance promulgated by the Tamil Nadu government yesterday taking over retail sale of liquor in the state.
Chennai, Oct 27: A retail Indian made foreign liquor
(IMFL) vendor today filed a petition in the Madras High Court,
challenging the ordinance promulgated by the Tamil Nadu
government yesterday taking over retail sale of liquor in the
state.
The ordinance, amending the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act,
said the Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation (TASMAC) and
cooperatives under it alone would hereafter undertake retail
liquor trade.
Charging that the government action was arbitrary, unreasonable and unsustainable and against the provisions of Article 14 and 12 of the Constitution, the petitioner, V Anbazhagan, sought to declare the ordinance as ultravires, unconstitutional and void.
The writ petition also sought a stay on the implementation of the ordinance till disposal of the petition.
The petitioner, who had moved the High Court after he had not received any response from the state authorities concerned his application for extension of his license for the excise year 2003-04, contended that takeover of retail sale of liquor would financially ruin him, as he had borrowed a huge amount of money from financiers on a high rate of interest.
The High Court has reserved its orders on his petition.
Anbazhagan pointed out that his license for selling IMFL during the year 2002-03 was extended by the state authorities only on the orders of the High Court and Supreme Court.
Bureau Report
Charging that the government action was arbitrary, unreasonable and unsustainable and against the provisions of Article 14 and 12 of the Constitution, the petitioner, V Anbazhagan, sought to declare the ordinance as ultravires, unconstitutional and void.
The writ petition also sought a stay on the implementation of the ordinance till disposal of the petition.
The petitioner, who had moved the High Court after he had not received any response from the state authorities concerned his application for extension of his license for the excise year 2003-04, contended that takeover of retail sale of liquor would financially ruin him, as he had borrowed a huge amount of money from financiers on a high rate of interest.
The High Court has reserved its orders on his petition.
Anbazhagan pointed out that his license for selling IMFL during the year 2002-03 was extended by the state authorities only on the orders of the High Court and Supreme Court.
Bureau Report