"Why Don't You Close Retail TASMAC Outlets By 9:30 PM Instead Of 10 PM?" Madras High Court Asks State

The Madras High Court recently asked the state government if it was feasible to close the retail liquor vending shops associated with TASMAC by 9:30 pm and keep the bars running till 10 pm so that the last minute consumers do not end up consuming alcohol on the streets.

The bench of Acting Chief Justice T Raja and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy was hearing pleas filed by two shopkeepers, for framing guidelines, rules, and regulations with regard to the place for consuming alcohol by purchasers after closing time of TASMAC shops and bars attached thereto. The petitioners had argued that allowing the shops and the bars to function till 10 pm had led to a situation where the last-minute purchasers consume alcohol in the streets causing a nuisance to women, children, and neighbors. Apart from nuisance to the public and pollution to the environment, the petitioner submitted that the situation may also result in an increase in the number of crimes against women and children.

The State government on Friday submitted its counter and informed the court that the Government was considering extending the functioning time of bars attached to the TASMAC retail vending shops beyond 10 pm. 

To this, the court asked the state to consider closing the retail outlets by 9:30 and closing the bars by 10 pm or 10:30 pm so that the consumers can remain in the bars and consume alcohol. The court directed Advocate General R Shunmughasundaram to get instructions on the same and adjourned the matter by a week.

The State also challenged the maintainability of the petitions and submitted that decisions with respect to the opening and closing of TASMAC liquor retail vending shops and the attached bars were purely a policy decision of the Government and the individuals had no locus standi to interfere with the policy decisions of the Government.

Senior Counsel K Sukumaran appeared for the petitioners and Advocate General R Shunmugasundaram appeared for the respondents.

Case Title: N Mohan and another v. Additional Chief Secretary, Prohibition and Excise Department and another

Case No: WP 34228 of 2022