WP/3915/2003 of SANJAY SINGH Vs THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIAandORS on 4 December 2003

ORDER

(PaS56d[on][ livlA-Decembei‘,][ 2003)]

1. By flling Writ P€ti1ion No. 3859/ 2003[under][ Article][ 226/227][ of][ the]Constitutioa of India the petitioner[Lallan][ Singh][ W110]is licencee 0ftheliquorshopsituatedatRataneur,District-Bilaspurhaschallenged the order dated[19112903]passed[by][ Respondent][ No.2,]Collector, Bilaspur, declaring[4m][ of][ December,][ 2003][ as][ ‘Dry-day’][ and]for closer of the wine shops[on][ account][ of][ counting][ of][ the][ votee][ of]Assembly Elections.

2. By filing Writ Petition No. 3891f2003[under][ Article][ 226/][ 227][ of][ the]Constitueion of India[the]petitioner[Ashok][ Singh,][ who][ is][ licencee][ of]the liquor shop situated[at][ Navagarh,]District. Janjgir Champa[has]challenged the order dated 21.11.2003 passed[by][ Respondent][ No.2,]Collector, Janjgir Champa,[declan'ng][ 4th][ of][ December,][ 2003][ as][ ‘Dry-]day’ and for closer of[the][ Wine][ shops][ on][ account][ of][ counting][ of][ the]votes of Assembly Elections.

Byfihhg Wrii E’6tit1‘ox1 No. 3946/2003 undsr Article 226/ 227 0f th€Constitu‘rion of India the p€titi011ers Ajay Shanna and Ashok KumarRaut who arelimnces‘: of theliquor shopssituat€dat Lakhanpm‘,Bha‘tgavnandSeorajpm‘,District-SurgujaandBaikuuthpur mDismci-Korga hava chansnged th€ orders datsd 21.11.2003 passedby R€s13011de11t No.2, Coliector, Korea and Raspondant No.4 Coll6ctor,Surguja, declaring 4th of December, 2GG3 as ‘Dly—day’and far closer01" the wine sheps 03 account of counting of the votes of AssemblyElectioae.

3. .Byfiling Writ Petition No. 39311’2003 under Article 226}2"7 of theConstitution of India the petifioner Kamta Prasad Choubey whoislicenceeof theliquorshopssituatedatKunkuriGroupDistricbJashpur Nagar has challengeti the order dated 14. 1 1.2003 passed byRespoedentNo.2,Collector,JashpurNagar,declaring4thofDecember,2003as‘Dly-elay’ andfor closer of thewills:shops onaccount of counting of the votes ofAsseinbly Election‘soiBy filing Wn‘t Petition No. 3915/2OG3 under Ain'cle 2261227 of theConstitution of India the petitioner Sanjay Singh who is licencee ofthe liquor shopsituated at Mano,District-Burg has Challenged theorder dated 13. 1 1.2003 passed by Respondent No.2, Collector, Burg,declan'ng 4th‘Dry-day’ of December,2003as andfor closer of the.wineshopsonaccountofcountingofthevotesof AssemblyElections.. The main grievance of the wn't petitioners is that the Collectors of therespective distn‘cts have issued the midnglled orders under section24(1)of theChhattisgarhExciseAct,1915for closer of the Wineshopsforpiesewationofthepublicneaceonlet December,2003beingapollingdayfortheStateLegislativeAssemblyofChhattisgarhandon4thofDecember,2003beingthe oi fl li l ,

oi

fl

li

l

,

day for connfing of tbs vot€s of 1:116 a35€mbly segumnts.[Thase]ord€rsare:issusdpursuantt0thedirectionsgivenbytheElectionCommissian6fIndiaundcrtheprovisionsofsub-section(1)ofSection 135 C of the Representation of Peoples Act 1951. Dming[the]last Vidhansabha electiong which were taken place[in][ the]year[1998]on the date of counting of votes the shops[were][ closed][ only][ of][ those]areawhichweresituatedWithintheboundariesofthemunicipalities/municipal corporations[at]the places[Where][ counting]of votes were held. Whereas the petitioners shops[are][ not][ situated][ at]the places where the counting of votes is going[to]take place[on][ 4‘11][ of]December 2003.

.Leained counsel for the petitioneis argued[that][ since][ these][ orders]havebeenissuedbytherespectiveCollectorsofthedistrictspursuant[to][ the][ directions]given[by][ the][ Election][ Commission][ under]section 135 C of the Repiesentation [of][ Peoples][ Act][ and][ as]per[the]provisions[of][ this]Section, only on the date[of]polling[the]selling ofhitoxicants and liquor could be prohibited[and][ the][ closer][ of][ the][ s110ps]can beordered butthereisnoprovision[under][ sub-sectionU)]ofSection135 Cof theActforcloser of theshops onthedateofcountingdf‘votes,thereforetheorderspassedbytherespectiveCollectorsarecontraijioftheprovisionsoflaw,arbitrary,unreasonable as such the impugned[orders][ should][ he]quashed.. Onthe other handlearned Additional AdvocateGeneralDr.N.K.Shukia argued that under section 24(1)of the ChhattiSgai‘li ExciseAct,1915 the district Collector] District[Magistrate][ is][ empowered][ to]issue directions for closer of the Wine shops in[the][ districts][ on][ any]day for preservation of the public peace.[He][ further][ argued][ that][ even]during earlier elections in the State[of][ Madhya][ Pradesh][ in][ the]year1998 and in 1999 also such directions were[issued’for][ Whole][ of][ the]/

district‘sonthedateof countingofthevotosof AssemblyandParliamont Elections,[therefore][ all][ the][ writ]petitions[be][ dismissed.]OL11:1 this connection[the][ relevant]provision[of][ sub-section(1)][ of][ Section]24 of the Chhattisgarh[Excise][ Act,]1915is reproduced herein[below]which envisage[that][ :-]

“24,Closing of shops for[the][ sake][ of]public peace—(l)[The]DistrictMagistiate, by notice[in][ writing][ to][ the][ licensee,][ may][ require,][ that][ any]shops in which any intoxicant[is][ sold][ shall][ be][ closed][ at][ such][ times][ or]for such period[as][ he][ may][ think][ necessaiy][ for][ the]preservation[of][ the]public peace.”

If welookintotheaboveprovisionsitisthesatisfactionof theconcerned Collector}[District][ Magistrate][ that][ if][ he][ is][ satisfied][ looking]to the facts and[circumstances]prevailing[on][ a]given[date][ and][ time]that in order to preserve[the]public peaceit is necessaryto issueorders for closer of the[shops][ of][ any][ intoxicant][ then][ he][ is][ entitled][ to]issue such directions.lt is not disputed that[on][ 4th][ of][ December][ the]countingof votesof theStateLegislativeAssemblysegmentsofChhattisgarhatallthedistrictheadquartersistotakeplace,therefore in the[above][ matteis][ the][ Collectors][ being][ satisfied][ with][ the]situation; in order[to]preserve[the]public peace[thought][ it][ necessary]to close of the liquor[shops]][ intoxicant][ shops][ of][ the][ respective][ areas.]

10. Now coming to the question[as][ argued][ by][ the][ learned][ counsel]for the petitioners[that][ the]petitioners[shops][ are][ not][ situated][ at][ the]places[where]thecountingof theVoteswill takeplace[on]4thofDecember,2003,therefore as per the past practicethe respectiveCollectors ought[not][ to][ have][ ordered][ for][ closer][ of][ all][ the][ Wine][ shops]situated in the respective[districts][ which][ were][ not][ situated][ Within][ the]municipal/municipalcorporationslimitsof'theplacesWherethecounting of the[votes][ will][ take]place.I don’t find any[substances][ in.]

swan-

f

this argunmnt of learnsd csunsel for thg petitianers for the masonthat with1.116Changsof time and withthepast[Experience]if iheDistn'ctMagiStiamS/Collactorsreachedtotheconclusionthatinonia" t6 preserve the public peaceit is necessary to close the wineehope of the Whole district fhen they can pass such orders aiso and itisnogroundforchallengeoftheorderoftheDistrictMagistrate/ Collector.It is of common knowledge that on the day ofcounting of votes the supporters of the Winning candidates take outprocessiorisandeveni11ordertocelebratethevictoryoftheircandidate some of them consume wine in large quantity and even theprocessions[are][ taken][ in][ the]streets and residential colonies andifthepersonsafterconsumingliquortakeprocessionthatwilldefinitely going to create problem for law and order and preservationof public peace.More overif the Wine shops are kept open of thenearby areas of the counting place that may also lead to disturbanceof the public peace because the persons can go to that area and canpurchase [Wine from][ those][ shops][ which][ ultimately][ defeats][ the][ very]purpose[of][ closer][ of][ the][ wine][ shops][ on][ the][ day][ of][ counting][ of][ votes.]Therefore,onthiscountalsotheimpugnedordersarenotunreasonable,arbitraryorinviolationof theprovisionsof sub-section (1) of Section 24 of the Act, 19 15.

11. As far as the arguments advanced by learned counsel for thepetitioners[that][ in][ the]past[only][ on][ the]polling day[the][ Wine][ shops]were closed and not on the date of counting. There is no force in thisargumentbecauseduringtheAssemblyElectionsof1998on27.11. 19§8 the Govt. of Madliya Pradesh issued the orders regardingcloser of the wine shops on the date of counting of votes and alsosimilar orders were passed on 24th September,1999 on the date of ,‘\\\i\/counting of votes of the Parliament Elections in the wholedistrictq/r

BecauseonfludateofpollingtheWineisconsumsdbythesuppm’iem of[the][ varicus][ candidaias][ and][ alSo][ wine][ is][ supp1i€d][ to][ me]general public,[similarly][ closcr][ 9f][ wine shope][ is][ also][ necessaly][ 011][ the]date of counting[of][ votes]for the reason that[on][ that][ day][ also][ the]people[coneumeii][ liquor in][ large]quantity[in][ order][ to][ celebrate][ the]victoiyoftheircandidatesandforthisreasonproblemforpresewatious[of][ public][ peace][ may][ arise][ in][ the][ area][ Therefore][ on][ this]count also the orders[of][ the][ Collectors][ are][ not][ unreasonable,][ violative]of the provisions[of sub—section](1)[of][ Section][ 24][ of][ the][ Act,][ 1915.]12.Now coming to[the]question[that the][ Collectois][ of][ the][ respective]Districts have issued[the][ impugned][ orders]pursuant[to][ the][ directions]given[by][ the][ Election][ Commission][ of][ India][ under][ sub-section][ (1)][ of]Section185 C of the[Representation][ of][ Peoples][ Act]1951andtheofthissectiondoesnotempowerstheElectionprovisionsCommission of India[to][ issue][ directions][ for][ closer][ of][ wine][ shops][ on]Electionthe day of counting[of][ votes.][ The]provision[empowers][ the]Commission[of][ India][ only]for closer of[wine][ shops][ on]thedate ofpolling[day.]It is tine that[sub-section](1)[of][ Section][ 135][ C][ of][ the][ Act]1951doesnotgivepowerstotheElectionCommissiontoissuedirections for prohibition[of][ sale][ of][ liquor}][ intoxicants][ on][ the][ date of]counting of votes,[but][ if][ We][ look]in to the provisions[of][ sub—section(1)]of Section 135[C][ of][ the][ Act][ 1951]it simply says that[“no][ spirituous,]fermented or[intoxicating][ liquors][ or][ other][ substances][ of][ a][ like][ nature]shall besold,given[or][ distrihuted]at a hotel,eating house,[tavern]shopor anyotherplace,publicorprivate,Withinapollingareaduring the period[of][ forty-eight][ hours][ ending][ with][ the][ hours][ hxed][ for]the conclusion[of]poll[for][ any][ election][ of][ that]polling[area”.][ This][ is][ a]general[ which][ prolnlaits][ the][ sale,][ distribution][ or][ supply][ of][ the]intoxicant substances[like][ liquor][ and][ other][ things.][ In][ this][ section][ it]

has not ba611 msntionad that The Election Cammission is empowsrsd to issue dimcfiens under this sectien.

13,

13,In th€ light of the arguments advances by the learned counselfor the petitieners if we look into the orders iseued by the ElectionCommissionof India01110thNovember,2063toalltheChiefSecretariesandChiefElectoralOfficersoftheStateinwhichAssemblyElectionsaretakiugplace,WhilereferringinthisorderSection 135 C (1) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 it hasbeen directed that the polling day should be declared as‘Dly Day’andthe datesof pollsarealso mentionedat pageNo.2.However,clause-3 of the directions is separate from the clause-1. Clause~3 ofthe directions says that the Commission further directs that the dayi.e,2. 12.2003 and 4. 12.2G03 as the case may be, on which countingof votes iii respect of Mizolam, Bihan Uttar Pradesh and in respect ofChhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan,N.C.’I‘. of Delhi, Gujaratand Kerala respectively is to be taken up, shall be declared ‘dly day’under the relevant laws in the State in order to assist the electionauthorities in the peaceful and smooth conduct of nee and fair pollTherefore,thesearegeneraldirectionsissuedbytheElectionCommission» ofIndiainordertoensurefree,fairandsmoothelec dons of the Assembly. In this clause-3 it has not been mentionedthat these dilections are being issued under section 135 C (1) of theAct,1951,TheElectionCommissionofIndiaisauthorizedandentitledtoissuedirectionsandordersunderArticle324oftheConstitutionoflndiainordertoensuresmooth,freeandfairelections.Therefore,thedirecn'onsissuedbytheElectionCommission of lndia’are not in any way unreasonable and arbitrary.Thesedirectionsaregeneral[advice]toalltherespectiveStatestoensure free,fair and smooth elections andin order to preserve thy/

//

/

public p€ace[durmg][ tha][ el€cti011]procass.It has been mentioned thatCollectors should issue direefions for closer of wine shops under therelevant Laws. Therefore,I don’t lind any force in the arguments oflearned counsel for the petitionels on this count also.

14. Apartfromthis,if welookintothegeneralandspecialconditions of thelicence issuedtothe petitionersfor liquor shopswhichthepetitionershaveacceptedatthetimeof takingof thelicence from the State Govt; these general and special conditions alebinding on each and eveiy licencee of the liquor shops. Ifwe 100k intotheconditionNo.11of thelicence whichenvisagethat theliquorshops premises will remain Close on15th August,2nd October,26thJanuary, 30th Janua,ry Holi, Mohorrum and three additional days onwhich the licences will be askedto close the liquor shop premises.Thelicencingauthotyriisalsoempoweredtoissuedirectionsregarding closer of the wine shops under the relevant clause in ordertopresewethepublicpeaceduringtheprocessof thegeneralelections. Therefore under this clause also whichis binding on thelicenceetheLicencingAuthority/DistrictMagistrate/'Collectorisentitled to issue directions during the process of General Elections forcloser ofthe Wine shops.

15.4m of December, 2003 beinga day for counting of the votes ofthe.StateLegislativeAssemblysegments,therefeorinordertomaintain the law and order situation and to preserve the public peaceand tranquility theDistrict Magistrates/ Collectors of the respectivedistricts have issued the orders for closer of the Wine shops under theprovisions[of][ sub-section](1)[of Section][ 24][ of][ the][ Chhattisgarh][ Excise]Act, 1915.

16. ItmayalsobementionedherethatitisthesubjectivesatisfactionoftherespectiveCollectorthatlookingtothe./

Thakur

circumStancesat thegiV€11tim€duringanypm‘iodincludingth€procass[of][ €1€ction][ i6.]polling[day][ and][ counting][ day][ if][ he][ reach][ t0][ the]conclusion that in ordcr to preserve[the]public pcace[the][ closer][ of][ the]Wine shopis necessary then such an order passed[by][ the]DistrictMagistrate] Collector cannot be subject[to][ the]judicial[review][ under]Article226/ 227of theConstitutionof India unlessthat orderismalafide or based on irrelevant and non existent grounds[or][ contraiy]to law.If we look into the facts of the present case,[they][ do][ not][ meet]the requirement of the above tests[as]4‘11 of December, 2003 beingday for counting of Votes of the State[Legislative][ Assembly.]lt is thecommon knowledge that on the date of counting[of][ votes][ supporters]ofthewinningcandidatesinordertocelebratevictonroftheircandidatearetakingprocessiontothestreets,roadsandintheresidential colonies and if during that period[they][ remain][ in][ state][ of]intoxicantconditionafterconsuming Winethat mayleadtothebreach of the public peace and tranquility.

17. Fortheforegoingreasons,Iamoftheopinionthattheimpugned orders in the above Writ petitions[does][ not][ sutfer][ from][ the]vice of arbitrariness and malahde[and][ orders][ are][ not]passed[on][ the]irrelevant andnon-existentgrounds,thereforealltheabovewrit,petitions[are][ liable][ to][ be][ dismissed][ and][ the][ same][ are][ dismissed,]