The division bench of Chief Justice TB Radhakrishnan and Justice Pritinker Diwakar junked the plea saying the decision to sell liquor through government outlets is a policy decision which warrants no interference from the court.
The petition, filed by social worker Mamta Sharma and two others, had contended that the decision was in violation of Article 47 of the Constitution which states that it is duty of the government to improve public health.
But the government, however, instead of discouraging liquor consumption, is promoting it by operating state-run shops in an open violation of the Article, petitioners' lawyer Satish Chandra Verma had contended.
In its reply, the government had said it was its policy decision.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
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
