CHENNAI: The Madras High Court on Wednesday stated that Tasmac and related contractors cannot be thinking of making money forever through liquor sale. The observation was made in an order by a special division bench of Justices N Sathish Kumar and D Bharatha Chakravarthy while disposing of the petitions filed by certain contractors of the empty bottle buyback scheme challenging recent tenders called for by Tasmac for selling eatables and collecting empty bottles in bars attached to retail outlets.
The business of selling liquor and all connected activities are res extra commercium (things that are not object of private rights), the bench said, adding, “If tomorrow the state decides to implement prohibition in full, nobody can claim any legitimate expectation.” (Legitimate expectation is a legal phrase denoting an expectation of benefit or relief as a consequence of a promise or representation made by administrative authorities.)
The bench further said that the petitioners, the bar contractors or Tasmac can never think that tipplers would continue on with their ill-habit of consuming alcohol and continue sending revenue their way.
The bench disapproved of the contention of the buyback scheme contractors, belonging to Coimbatore North, South and Perambalur, that their income would drop if a separate tender is given for collecting bottles in attached bars. The court then ruled that the impugned tender notifications are valid and Tasmac can finalise the tenders in accordance with the law.
It may be noted that Tasmac introduced the bottle buyback scheme only in certain districts following High Court orders. Under the scheme, Rs 10 would be collected in addition to the actual cost of the bottle of liquor and the amount would be refunded on returning the bottle.
Adv commissioner appointed to inspect Kilmaruvathur lake
Chennai: The first bench of Madras High Court consisting of Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy has appointed KA Prabhakaran as the advocate commissioner to inspect Kilmaruvathur Lake and submit a report on whether encroachments on the water body have been removed or not. The order was made on a contempt of court petition filed by one Raja from Chothupakkam alleging that authorities had failed to remove the lake encroachments as per court order. The advocate commissioner has been directed to file the report by January 11. Raja had filed a petition in 2018 seeking orders to remove the encroachments. The government in turn had filed a status report saying encroachments had been removed, but Raja contended the report was not true and filed the contempt petition.