MADURAI: The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court quashed the permission granted to a TASMAC outlet at Perumangalur post in Thanjavur, citing the haste in which the nod was given without properly considering the objections raised by the local people.
The court slammed the Thanjavur district collector for failing to verify the objections and directed him to conduct a fresh inquiry and dispose of the objections as per relevant rules, before taking a final decision.
"The entire exercise has been carried out without due consideration of the spirit of the Rules, but only with the consideration of the sale of the Spirit (alcohol). Spirit (alcohol) can be sold; let not the self-esteem and conscience," Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy observed.
But the allegations, though proven, fall short of a charge of contempt of court, he added, and closed the contempt petition, while allowing the main petition.
The petitioner, KS Ravichandran, alleged that the collector passed an order on September 11, 2025, permitting TASMAC to open an outlet in Perumangalur post without hearing the local people's opinion. When the residents moved the high court, the authorities informed that a fresh notice would be issued and an inquiry would be heard on March 6, 2026 to hear the objections, following which the petition was disposed of by directing the collector to decide the matter as per the Tamil Nadu Liquor Retail Vending (In Shops and Bars) Rules, 2003. However, on March 11, the collector rejected the objections and granted permission for the shop and the shop was opened the same day, though the rejection order was communicated to the petitioner only two days later.
Challenging the same, the petitioner moved a contempt petition as well as a fresh petition for closure of the shop. Hearing both sides, the judge noted that the collector, citing election works, had instructed the District Revenue Officer to conduct the inquiry and passed the order based on the oral inputs received from the officer.
Noting that the entire exercise was done in a hasty manner without allowing the residents to go for an appeal under the Rules, the judge remarked, "Before this Court, for every other genuine request, such as the repair of a school or hospital building, the ready answer is that the Moral Code of Conduct is in force. But how the location and opening of the TASMAC shop are so important defies logic."
In his rejection order, the collector cited that the TASMAC and a women's association had sought the opening of an outlet in Perumangalur claiming that non-availability of an outlet in the village was leading to illegal sale of liquor and forced alcoholics to travel to the nearby Thiruvappadi village. While returning in a drunken state, the drunkards indulged in robbery, dacoity and also caused accidents, the collector quoted from the TASMAC manager's communication.
But when the judge verified with the local police, the above claims were found to be false, following which the judge slammed the collector for failing to inquire into the claims.
Even if there is an allegation of illicit liquor sale, it is for the police to take action so that another incident like Kallakurichi does not recur, he added and passed the above order.