G M BREWERIES LIMITED Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution, a declaration has been sought to the effect that the expression Maximum Retail Price as defined in Rule 2(d) of the Maharashtra Potable Liquor (Fixation of Maximum Retail Prices) Rules 1996 excludes octroi duty. An appropriate writ has been sought for quashing and setting aside a circular dated 23rd January, 2005 issued by the Commissioner of State Excise in the State Government. By that circular, an earlier direction dated 8th October, 2001 came to be rescinded and it was clarified that the maximum retail price shall be declared so as to include octroi duty.

(2.) In our view, the answer to the petition lies in the plain language of Rule 2(d). Rule 2(d) defines the expression Maximum Retail Price as follows :

(3.) The provisions of the Maharashtra Potable Liquor (Fixation of Maximum Retail Prices) Rules, 1996 were challenged before and upheld by a Division Bench of this Court in Baramati Grape Industries Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra (1998(1) Mh. L. J. 245). This Court held that Section 11 of the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949 permits the manufacture of an intoxicant only on the terms and conditions prescribed in a licence which is granted under the Rules. Therefore, it was held that the Rules could prescribe the maximum retail price at which an intoxicant or liquor could be sold. The power which has been conferred on the State Government to frame rules was upheld against the challenge that it was uncontrolled. Finally, the Bench held that there was no constitutional right guaranteed to the petitioners to recover the price of liquor at any rate and in any event there was a prohibition in dealing with potable liquor except as provided in the Act, the rules and the terms of licence. The learned AGP has stated before the Court that a Special Leave Petition that was filed before the Supreme Court against the decision was withdrawn.