(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith, by consent of the parties.
(2.) The challenge raised in this Writ Petition is to the order dtd. 2/4/2024 that has been issued by the Collector (State Excise). By the said order issued in exercise of powers under Sec. 142 of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949 (for short 'the Act of 1949 "), a prohibition has been imposed on the operation of licenses issued under the Act of 1949, in view of the ensuing parliamentary elections. The grievance of the Petitioners is that insofar as the District of Raigad is concerned, there are two Lok Sabha constituencies of Maval and Raigad within the said District. In the Lok Sabha constituency-Maval, the Vidhan Sabha Constituencies of Panvel, Karjat and Uran are included. Insofar as Lok Sabha constituency-Raigad is concerned, Vidhan Sabha constituencies of Pen, Alibagh, Shrivardhan and Mahad are included.
(3.) According to the learned counsel for the Petitioners, the impugned order seeks to restrict the operation of such licenses for the entire Raigad District ignoring the provisions of Sec. 135-C of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (for short 'the Act of 1951'). Under the said provision, it is only in the polling area that the sale of liquor is prohibited. Since the impugned order is excessive in nature, it is submitted that its operation deserves to be restricted in terms of Sec. 135-C of the Act of 1951. Secondly, it is urged that the period for which the prohibition should apply has not been indicated in the impugned order. Referring to the order dated 29 th October 2021 passed in Writ Petition No.12201 of 2021 (Nanded Zilla Madya Vikretasanghatana, through its Authorised Signatory/CL III License Holder Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Anr), at the Aurangabad Bench, it is submitted that such prohibition ought to operate only till the time the polling is completed. It is, therefore, submitted that the impugned order deserves to be modified accordingly.