Surendra Mohan,J. These writ appeals are all directed against a common order passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) Nos: 11971, 11986, 12040 and 12098/2014. The writ petitions were filed challenging a prohibitory order issued by the District Collector/District Magistrate, Thrissur ordering that there shall be a prohibition against the supply and sale of all types of liquor and intoxicating drugs within the Thrissur Corporation limits, from 9.5.2014 to 2 p.m on 10.5.2014. The order was issued in view of the famous Thrissur Pooram Festival that falls on 9.5.2014 and 10.5.2014.
2. W.A.673/2014 is filed by the Kerala State Beverages (Manufacturing & Marketing) Corporation Ltd complaining that, as many as 10 FL1 shops operated by the Corporation would be affected by the prohibitory order. According to Adv.C.S.Ajith Prakash who appears for the appellant the prohibitory order does not refer to any report of the Police authorities, which is necessary to precede the issue of any order in the nature of the one that is under challenge. The prohibitory order only refers to a request from the District Police Chief, which is not sufficient. It is pointed out that, the prohibitory order has been made applicable to the entire Corporation of Thrissur. Consequently, even shops that are situate 3 to 4 kms. away from the place where the festival is being conducted have to be closed. Reference is made to the decisions rendered by this Court on previous occasions in relation to other festivals, where similar prohibitory orders have been set aside finding them to have exceeded the geographical limits. Apart from certain stray instances of violence that have taken place months back, no serious incident from which a threat to breach of peace could be deduced, has been referred to or considered by the District Collector. Therefore, it is contended that, the impugned order is liable to be stayed.
3. According to Adv.N.Raghuraj who appears for the appellant in W.A.677/2014 the appellants are conducting bar attached hotels offering three star and four star facilities. They are also classified as such by the competent authority. Such hotels are not frequented by locals or the people attending the festival, in view of the expensive rates charged for the liquor provided. They are not easily accessible to the general public, it is contended. Apart from the above, the liquor is mainly served to the inmates of such hotels who are the persons who make use of the facilities offered. By reason of the prohibitory order such persons as well as the tourists are denied the benefits of such facilities. It is also pointed out that, similar establishments located just 3 kms. away from the place of the festival are permitted to function freely, for the reason that they are located within the Panchayat areas falling outside the limits of the Corporation of Thrissur. Therefore, it is contended that the prohibitory order cannot achieve its objective of preventing liquor from being used by the people coming to attend the festival.
4. According to Adv. Nireesh Mathew who appears for the appellant in W.A.675/2014, four star hotels are not necessary to be prohibited from vending liquor for the reason that the local people have no access to such establishments. The consequence of the prohibitory order would be that spurious liquor would be sold during the festival time. The above aspects not having been considered by the impugned order, it is contended that the same is liable to be stayed.
5. The appellant in W.A. 678/2014 is a club by name Banerji Memorial Club. According to the counsel for the appellant, the club has been in existence for the past many years. Though it has a membership of 675 at present, the people who consume liquor from the club is as low as 76 and the income generated from such sale is only Rs.15,000/- per day. Outsiders are not permitted to consume liquor in the premises and therefore it is contended that there is absolutely no justification in prohibiting sale of liquor in the club.
6. After considering the contentions of the respective counsel appearing for the petitioners in the writ petitions the learned Single Judge has by order dated 6.5.2014 declined to grant the interim order that was sought for. According to the learned Single Judge the impugned order has proceeded to issue the prohibition finding that there was every chance for a law and order situation arising. Therefore, only a temporary ban has been imposed spanning over two days, the 9th and 10th of May, 2014. In matters of administration, it has been found that, interference with the administrative authorities' order shall be only when such interference is found to be absolutely necessary.
7. We have heard the respective counsel appearing for the appellants. We have been taken through the order that is under challenge. We have considered the rival contentions anxiously.
8. The prohibitory order passed by the District Collector is evidenced by Ext.P11 in W.A.673/2014. It is true that Ext.P11 does not refer to any report of the District Police Chief. What is referred to is only a letter dated 6.3.2014 by which, the District Police Chief has requested for the temporary closure of bar attached hotels, liquor shops and toddy shops within the Thrissur Corporation during the Thrissur Pooram 2014. A perusal of Ext.P11 shows that the District Collector has applied his mind to the situation that is anticipated. It has been noticed that lakhs of people would attend the Thrissur Pooram. It is stated that, according to the Assistant Commissioner of Police a youth who had died was intoxicated. It has also been noticed that there have been violence and clashes in the past, during the Thrissur Pooram though, no specific instances have been referred to. It has been observed further in Ext.P11 as follows:-
“There is communal tension prevailing in the district due to attack on 12 Christian Shrines in different parts of the district. A hartal was also called by some Hindu organisations on 28.4.2014 in the district. The chances of further clashes cannot be ruled out now.”
The above statement shows that, the District Collector anticipates further clashes and law and order situation, on communal basis. It is true that the basis of the assessment of the said law and order situation is not disclosed in Ext.P11. But, a perusal of Ext.P11 shows that there has been proper application of mind. The District Collector's opinion is that there are chances of a law and order situations arising and that to prevent such instances, it is necessary to prohibit the sale and consumption of liquor during the Thrissur Pooram. The said opinion cannot be dismissed outright as unreasonable or untenable. Considering the magnitude of the crowd that is expected to attend the festival, the chances of such a situation cannot be ruled out. Therefore, the preventive action initiated is justified. It cannot also be said that the order that is under challenge is vitiated by non application of mind. We find that the order has been issued sufficiently early, on 30.4.2014 affording sufficient opportunity to the petitioners to challenge the same before this Court. No material has been placed before us to justify a conclusion that the assessment of the law and order situation made by the District Collector is wrong or not justified. It is true that, in the case of other festivals of lesser importance, directions have been issued confining the operation of the prohibitory order to the areas immediately surrounding the place where the festivals were held. In the present case the prohibitory order has been confined to the limits of Thrissur Corporation. Considering the importance of the festival and the nature of the crowd that is expected to gather, the same is justified. We do not find that any interference with the said order is called for or that the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge requires any modification. The prohibitory order would cease to operate at 2 p.m. tomorrow, 10.5.2014. It has also been directed in the prohibitory order that the Police and the Excise authorities shall take necessary steps to prevent illegal sale of spurious liquor, drugs and intoxicants especially on the festival days. If the said directions are implemented in letter and spirit, chances of spurious liquor being sold during the festival also could be curbed.
For the above reasons, writ appeals are dismissed. No costs.
Sd/-
K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj /True copy/ Sd/- ANIL.K.NARENDRAN Judge