INDIAN HOTEL AND RESTAURANT ASSOCIATION (AHAR) GENERAL SECRETARY vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA HOME DEPARTMENT SECRETARY HOME AFFAIRS. Supreme Court, 17-01-2019
| Judge | HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHUSHAN, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER |
| Court | Supreme Court (India) |
| Date | 17 January 2019 |
| Parties | INDIAN HOTEL AND RESTAURANT ASSOCIATION (AHAR) GENERAL SECRETARYTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA HOME DEPARTMENT SECRETARY HOME AFFAIRS |
| Docket Number | W.P.(C) No.-000576-000576 / 2016 |
1
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 576 OF 2016
INDIAN HOTEL AND RESTAURANT
ASSOCIATION (AHAR) & ANR. .....APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. .....RESPONDENT(S)
W I T H
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 24 OF 2017
A N D
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 119 OF 2017
J U D G M E N T
A.K. SIKRI, J.
This batch of three Writ Petitions was heard together and is being
disposed of by this Common Judgment as similar issues and prayers
are raised in all these petitions.
2) The instant writ petitions have been preferred under Article 32 of the
Constitution of India, challenging certain provisions of the Maharashtra
Prohibition of Obscene Dance in Hotels, Restaurant and Bar Rooms and
Protection of Dignity of Women (Working therein) Act, 2016 (hereinafter
Digitally signed by
ASHWANI KUMAR
Date: 2019.01.17
16:46:53 IST
Reason:
Signature Not Verified
2
referred to as the ‘Act’) and also the Rules framed there under being the
Maharashtra Prohibition of Obscene Dance in Hotels, Restaurant and
Bar Rooms and Protection of Dignity of Women (Working therein) Rules,
2016 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Rules’) which, as the Petitioners
submit, violate the Fundamental Rights of the Petitioners guaranteed
under Articles 14, 15, 19 (1)(a), 19 (1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of
India.
3) The petitioner No. 1 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 576 of 2016 is an
Association of various Hotel Owners and Bar Owners and/or Conductors
of the same, who carry on business of running Restaurants and Bars in
Mumbai and is duly registered under the Trade Unions Act. Petitioner
No. 2 is the secretary of petitioner No. 1 and is a citizen of India, who
runs a restaurant and bar.
The petitioner in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 24 of 2017, R.R. Patil
Foundation is a registered Union under the provisions of the Bombay
Public Trust Act and the President thereof has been authorised to file the
writ petition.
The petitioner in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 119 of 2017 is the Bhartiya
Bargirls Union, registered under the Trade Union Act, 1926 and
represented through its Hony. President. The petition is filed in a
representative capacity on behalf of a large number of women dancers,
singers and waitresses.
3
4) Respondent No.1 in all the three writ petitions is the State of
Maharashtra. The other respondents in the three petitions comprise of
various departments/authorities of the State of Maharashtra.
5) A brief historical description behind enacting this Act and the Rules is as
follows:
Any person intending to start an Eating House and Restaurant is
required to obtain permission from the Municipal Corporation under the
Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act as also the Food and Drugs
Administration. After a Grade-I licence is granted to the establishment,
and the establishment complies with the requirements under Rules 44
and 45 of the Bombay Foreign Liquor Rules, 1953 framed under the
provisions of the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949, the establishment is
granted an FL III licence for sale of Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) in
the Restaurant. Further, persons desiring to serve only Beer in the
Restaurant apply for a licence under the Special Permit and Licenses
Rules framed under the provisions of the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949
and are granted licenses in Form ‘E’ for running a Beer Bar. The
persons having Eating Houses besides obtaining an FL III or Form ‘E’
licence under the provisions of the relevant Rules framed under the
Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949, are required to have licence under the
Bombay Police Act, 1951, called the Public Entertainment Licence, from
respondent No.2, which is the Licensing Authority under the Rules
To continue reading
Request your trial