Case Note & Summary
The Public Interest Litigation was filed by Bhimshakti Vichar Manch, a registered trust, and another petitioner, challenging the Foodgrain Based Distillery Integrated Finance Scheme notified by the State of Maharashtra vide Government Resolution dated 8 June 2007. The petitioners contended that the scheme arbitrarily incentivized the manufacture of alcohol from foodgrains, diverting essential foodgrains from human consumption, and thereby threatening the right to life and food security of the citizens. They alleged that the scheme was irrational, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, and benefited politically connected persons. The petitioners highlighted that molasses-based distilleries already existed in sufficient numbers and that the Finance and Planning Departments had raised multiple objections. The State Government had earlier decided to stop issuing new letters of intent under the scheme. The High Court heard the matter on 10 March 2010, with the Advocate General appearing for the State. The judgment remains incomplete in the text provided.
Issue of Consideration
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.259 OF 2009
Case Details
2010 LawText (BOM) (03) 94
Public Interest Litigation No. 259 of 2009
Ferdino I. Rebello, J.H. Bhatia
Mr. Uday Warunjikar with Mr. Nitesh Bhutekar and Mr. Rahul More for the petitioners; Mr. R.M. Kadam, Advocate General with Mr. S.R. Nargolkar for Respondent Nos. 1 & 2; Mr. S.R. Ganbavale for respondent No.3; Mr. Subodh Dharmadhikari with Mr. S. Garud for applicants in C.A. Nos.18/2010 to 21/2010 & 25/2010; Mr. V.R. Dhond for applicant in C.A.No. 22/2010; Mr. P.S. Dani for applicant in C.A.No. 24/2010
Bhimshakti Vichar Manch, Shri. Chetan Janardhan Kamble & Others
State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Public Interest Litigation challenging a State Government scheme
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought to quash the Foodgrain Based Distillery Integrated Finance Scheme notified by G.R. dated 8.6.2007
Filing Reason
The scheme provided financial incentives for distilleries manufacturing alcohol from foodgrains, which petitioners alleged was arbitrary, irrational, diverted essential foodgrains from public distribution, and benefited politically connected individuals, violating constitutional rights
Issues
Whether the Foodgrain Based Distillery Integrated Finance Scheme is arbitrary, unreasonable, and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution
Whether the scheme violates the right to life and livelihood under Article 21 by diverting foodgrains meant for human consumption
Submissions/Arguments
The policy of the State is arbitrary, unreasonable, and irrational, therefore violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.
Diverting foodgrains required for citizens' consumption for alcohol manufacture affects the right to life and livelihood of citizens as they are denied access to foodgrains, violating Article 21.
The scheme benefits persons with political connections; many directors of beneficiary units are politicians or their relatives.
The Finance Department and Planning Department raised objections regarding budgetary viability and the decrease in jowar cultivation.
Existing molasses-based distilleries are sufficient to meet alcohol demand; there is no need for foodgrain-based units.
The subsidy of Rs. 10 per litre is excessive and defeats the interest of sugar factories and cooperative units.
The scheme is contrary to public interest and based on uncertain rainfall events.
Judgment Excerpts
Under the scheme if a distillery is set up for manufacture of Alcohol the manufacturers are eligible for financial incentives of Rs. 10 per ltr by way of concession from excise duty. Similarly subsidy ranging from 150% to 200% is also provided under the scheme.
The policy decision of the State therefore, is not justifiable. The foodgrain which is used for manufacture of alcohol is essential food for the citizens facing scarcity in so far as the State of Maharashtra is concerned.
Procedural History
Petitioners filed the PIL challenging the scheme. The High Court issued Rule and by consent heard the matter forthwith on 10 March 2010. Oral arguments were advanced by both sides. The text of the judgment provided is incomplete.
Acts & Sections
- Bombay Public Trust Act:
- Right to Information Act, 2005:
- Constitution of India: Article 14, Article 21
