AAP alleges laxity by Goa govt in dealing with liquor ban

Image
Press Trust of India Panaji
Last Updated : Apr 05 2017 | 11:07 AM IST
The AAP in Goa has accused the Manohar Parrikar government of being lax in tackling the situation which arose in the tourist state following the SC order banning sale of liquor along highways.
"We express grave concern over the laxity with which the state government is dealing with the alarming situation which has risen out of the Supreme Court ruling on liquor outlets along highways," AAP leader Elvis Gomes told reporters here yesterday.
Both the government and the Opposition in Goa miserably failed to gauge the seriousness of the issue throughout the two-year-long proceedings in the Supreme Court, he added.
"Why did Goa not present its case like Sikkim and Meghalaya did, and seek exemptions and special provisions for Goa ?," Gomes asked.
The AAP has demanded that the Goa government work towards getting state highways de-notified wherever legally feasible.
"National highways where by-pass roads are already commissioned, those portions should also be de-notified," he felt.
Gomes said in the meantime, the office of Advocate General of Goa and State Law Department be instructed to work on approaching the SC with Goa's special case citing the 105-km coastline and 33 per cent forest cover of the state to seek exemption and/or reduction in the buffer zone adjoining the highways.
Chief Minister Parrikar had yesterday said that his government was contemplating approaching the SC for proper clarification (on the order), and possibly seek some special consideration for the tourist state.
He said that following the SC order pronounced on March 31, around 1,000 out of 3,000-odd outlets (in Goa) that were facing closure got a respite but the problem persists for the remaining 2,000 vends.
The apex court on March 31 modified its order banning liquor vends within 500 metres on national and state highways, reducing the distance to 220 metres in areas having a population of up to 20,000.
However, a bench headed by Chief Justice J S Khehar, had made it clear that its December 15, 2016 order banning such vends within 500 metres of highways shall remain operative for areas other than specified in the latest order.

Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

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

More From This Section

First Published: Apr 05 2017 | 11:07 AM IST

Next Story