Limitation Act | Litigant Cannot Be Punished For Court's Own Docket Load: J&K High Court Illicit Affair Alone Cannot Make a Man Guilty of Abetting Suicide: Supreme Court Quashes Charge Under Section 306 IPC Landlord Cannot Be Punished for Slowness of Courts: Supreme Court on Bonafide Need in Eviction Suits Expect States To Enact Laws Regulating Unlicensed Money Lenders Charging Exorbitant Interest Contrary To 'Damdupat': Supreme Court Accused Who Skips Lok Adalat After Seeking It, Then Cries 'Prejudice', Cannot Claim Apprehension of Denial of Justice: Madras High Court Refuse To Transfer Case IO Cannot Act Without Prior Sanction: Gujarat High Court Grants Bail, Flags Procedural Lapse in Religious Conversion Case Electricity Board Strictly Liable For Unprotected Transformer, 7-Year-Old Cannot Be Guilty Of Contributory Negligence: Allahabad High Court POCSO Conviction Can't Stand For Offence Not Charged: Delhi High Court Member of Unlawful Assembly Cannot Escape Conviction By Claiming He Only Carried a Lathi and Struck No One: Allahabad High Court Jurisdiction Cannot Be Founded On Casual Or Incidental Facts If Not Have A Direct Nexus With The Lis: : Delhi High Court Clause Stating Disputes "Can" Be Settled By Arbitration Is Not A Binding Arbitration Agreement: Supreme Court State Cannot Plead Helplessness Against Sand Mafia; Supreme Court Warns Of Paramilitary Deployment, Complete Mining Ban In MP & Rajasthan Authority Cannot Withdraw Subsidy Citing Non-Compliance When It Ignored Repeated Requests For Inspection: Supreme Court Out-of-State SC/ST/OBC Candidates Cannot Claim Rajasthan's Reservation Benefits in NEET PG Counselling: Rajasthan High Court Supreme Court Upholds Haryana's Regularisation Of Qualified Ad Hoc Staff As 'One-Time Measure', Strikes Down Futuristic Cut-Offs

Orissa High Court Upholds Government’s Policy Decision on Liquor Shop Reopening: Not Subject To Routine Judicial Revie

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling that underscores the sanctity of government policy decisions, the Honourable Dr. Justice B.R. Sarangi and The Honourable Mr. Justice Murahari Sri Raman delivered a judgment upholding the denial of reopening an IMFL “ON” shop. The judgment, issued on August 14, 2023, carries far-reaching implications for the judicial review of government policies and decisions.

The petitioner had sought to challenge the rejection of their representation for reopening a liquor shop that had been previously closed due to a Supreme Court judgment prohibiting liquor sale along highways. The shop owner argued that subsequent relaxations provided by the apex court warranted the reopening of the establishment.

In their insightful observation, the bench emphasized, “The Government’s discretion to formulate policies and decisions, including licensing, is not subject to routine judicial review. Courts consider legality, not the wisdom of policy decisions.” The judgment made it clear that while the judiciary has the authority to review decision-making processes, it should not interfere with the rightful power of the government to make policy decisions.

The case revolved around the delicate balance between individual business interests and government policies aimed at ensuring public welfare. The bench held that the petitioner’s claim for reopening the shop in its original location was in direct conflict with the government’s well-considered policy decisions based on directions from the apex Court. This ruling reinforces the principle that judicial review should focus on the legality of the process rather than the correctness of policy decisions.

This judgment echoes several landmark cases that have reaffirmed the separation of powers between the judiciary and the executive branch. The bench’s decision serves as a reminder that the courts must exercise restraint in matters of government policy while safeguarding citizens’ rights through legal scrutiny of the decision-making process.

The ruling not only settles the specific case at hand but also contributes to the jurisprudence surrounding the review of government policies. As the legal landscape continues to evolve, this judgment stands as a testament to the judiciary’s commitment to upholding the principles of democratic governance and the rule of law.

 Date of Decision: 14th August, 2023

Shiv Prasad Bhagat vs State of Odisha & Ors. 

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Shiv_Prasad_Bhagat_vs_State_Of_Odisha_Ors_on_14_August_2023_OrissaHC.pdf"]

Latest Legal News