A division bench comprising Justice Thothathil B Radhakrishnan and Justice P B Suresh Kumar declined to stay the operation of the order culminating in the closure of bar hotels while dismissing a batch of appeals from bar owners.
The government had earlier declined to renew the licences of 418 bar hotels as they were not up to the standards.
Also Read
The bench held that the bar owners could not make any prima facie case and they were not entitled for stay of government decision.
The court rejected their plea that the policy was 'hatched overnight'.
Advocate General KP Dandapani informed the court that the government's excise policy had been mentioned in the UDF manifesto itself. So, supporting materials are there is to justify the government action.
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
