1 2025:CGHC:61194-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPPIL No. 102 of 2025 Anil Yadav S/o Shri Gajlal Yadav Aged About 42 Years R/o Ward No. 19 Kathi, Gram Panchayat Kikirda, Police Station- Birra, Tahsil- Hasaud, District- Sakti (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Department Of Commercial Tax (Excise), Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Excise Commissioner Chhattisgarh, GST Bhawan, North Block, Sector-19, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Collector Sakti, District- Sakti (C.G.) 4 - District Excise Officer Office Of The District Excise Officer, District- Sakti (C.G.) 5 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Sakti, District- Sakti (C.G.) 6 - Gram Panchayat Kikirda Through Secretary Gram Panchayat Kikirda, Janpad Panchayat Jaijaipur, District- Sakti (C.G.) 7 - Sarpanch Gram Panchayat Kikirda, Janpad Panchayat Jaijaipur, District- Sakti (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ramesh Nayak, Advocate. For Respondents No.1 to 5/State : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Deputy Advocate General BABLU RAJENDRA BHANARKAR Digitally signed by BABLU RAJENDRA BHANARKAR Date: 2025.12.16 18:03:44 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 16.12 .2025 1. Heard Mr. Ramesh Nayak, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Shashank Thakur, learned Deputy Advocate General, appearing for respondents No.1 to 5/State. 2. The present writ petition (PIL) has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers: “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the entire records leading to the issuance of the impugned order dated 11.06.2025 (Annexure P-1) issued by Respondent No. 4. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 11.06.2025, whereby the Country Liquor Shop is being relocated to Village Kikirda. 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to produce the alleged "Gram Panchayat" Resolution" and conduct an independent inquiry into its authenticity. 10.4 That, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to not open any liquor shop in Village Kikirda, considering the existence of a shop in village Birra near village Basantpur and the distance of 16 Km from the original location (Hasaud). 3 10.5 That the Hon'ble Court be further pleased to accept the instant writ petition as Public Interest Litigation (PIL). 10.6 That the Hon'ble Court be further pleased to issue any other writ or directions or orders against the individual respondents looking to the facts and in the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity. An affidavit in support of the petition is filed.” 3. The facts of the case are that, the petitioner is a permanent resident of Village Kikirda, District Sakti (Chhattisgarh) and is an elected Panch of Ward No. 19 (Kathi), Gram Panchayat Kikirda, Janpad Panchayat Jaijaipur, District Sakti. Village Kikirda is a peaceful, agriculture-dominated village located in a tribal belt, following a traditional joint family social structure and historically free from any government-sanctioned liquor outlets. The village is situated at a distance of more than 16 kilometers from village Hasaud and to the shock and dismay of the villagers, Respondent No. 4, i.e., the District Excise Officer, Sakti, passed an order bearing No./Excise/Contract/2025/1215 dated 11.06.2025, directing the relocation of the “Country Liquor Shop, Hasaud” to village Kikirda to function as a “Composite Country Liquor Shop.” The said order falsely records that the Gram Panchayat Kikirda had passed a resolution consenting to the establishment of the liquor shop and that an objection- free site was available in the village. The villagers strongly opposed the said decision and submitted a representation dated 31.10.2025 to the 4 Collector, Sakti, warning that if the proposed liquor shop was not cancelled, they would be compelled to launch an indefinite agitation, for which the administration would be solely responsible. 4. The villagers further brought to the notice of the Collector that village Kikirda is already facing the menace of illegal Mahua liquor sales, which the police authorities have failed to effectively curb. Instead of taking action against illegal liquor trade, the State authorities are aggravating the problem by permitting a legal liquor outlet in the village, which is likely to further deteriorate law and order. A complaint in this regard was also submitted on 31.10.2025. The impugned order is arbitrary and irrational, as it purports to “relocate” the liquor shop from Hasaud despite the existence of an operational liquor shop at village Birra near Village Basantpur, which is only about 5 kilometers from village Kikirda. Forcing the relocation to Kikirda, which is 16 kilometers away, clearly shows that the decision is not based on administrative convenience, but is intended to introduce a liquor shop into an unwilling and sensitive village. Upon inquiry, the villagers discovered that the alleged Gram Sabha resolution referred to in the impugned order was never genuinely passed. It was revealed that Sarpanch Smt. Gomati Manjhi is under undue influence of certain anti-social elements, namely Bundram Chandra and others, who misused her official seal and signature to fabricate false consent. Consequently, a detailed written complaint regarding fraud and misuse of office was submitted to the Superintendent of Police, Sakti, on 10.11.2025. 5 5. On the same day, i.e., 10.11.2025, the villagers also submitted a representation to the Collector, Sakti, requesting an immediate inquiry into the misuse of the Sarpanch’s position and the fraudulent acts committed in the name of the Gram Panchayat to facilitate the liquor shop. When women of the village peacefully attempted to oppose the implementation of the impugned order and approached the Sarpanch, they were subjected to verbal abuse and physical assault by the Sarpanch’s representatives, namely Bundram Chandra and others, on 10.11.2025. The perpetrators threatened the women with dire consequences. A formal complaint regarding the said assault and hooliganism was lodged with the Station House Officer, Police Station Birra, on the same date. The proposed site for the liquor shop is illegal and prohibited under the Chhattisgarh Excise Rules, as it is located within approximately 100 meters of the Baddheshwar Temple, a place of significant religious importance visited daily by villagers, and also shares a boundary with the Village Gothan (Government cattle shelter). Establishment of a liquor shop at such a location violates statutory distance norms and endangers the safety and sanctity of the religious place, the Gothan, women, children, farmers, and cattle. The entire village has unanimously opposed the establishment of the liquor shop. The villagers, along with the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Kikirda, submitted an application to the Station House Officer, Birra, stating that Village Kikirda is culturally sensitive and that opening a liquor shop would jeopardize the safety of women and the future of children. 6. Despite repeated objections, complaints, and representations, the 6 respondent authorities continued with the proposed plan. Left with no alternative remedy, the villagers submitted a final representation dated 10.11.2025 to the Collector, Sakti, warning that if the liquor shop is not cancelled, they would be compelled to stage a sit-in demonstration and launch an indefinite agitation, for which the administration would be fully responsible. These facts give rise to the present petition challenging the arbitrary, illegal, and fraudulent action of the respondent authorities in relocating the liquor shop to Village Kikirda. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order dated 11.06.2025 violates the petitioner’s Fundamental Right to Life and Personal Liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution, which includes the right to live with dignity in a safe and nuisance-free environment. Forcibly establishing a liquor shop in a peaceful, residential, agriculture-dominated village like Kikirda poses a serious threat to public order, women’s safety, and the future of children. The incident of assault on village women on 10.11.2025 itself demonstrates the breakdown of law and order and the failure of the State to protect life and dignity. He further submits that the decision to “relocate” the liquor shop from Hasaud to Kikirda is manifestly arbitrary, irrational, and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. While an existing liquor shop is available at village Birra, merely 5 kilometers from Kikirda, the authorities have chosen to shift the shop 16 kilometers away into a liquor-free and unwilling village. Such action is unreasonable, lacks administrative logic, and amounts to a colorable exercise of power intended to benefit private liquor contractors, particularly when the 7 alleged Gram Panchayat consent forming the basis of the order is fraudulent and vitiated by misuse of the Sarpanch’s seal. He also submits that the impugned order is further illegal for violation of principles of natural justice and the Chhattisgarh Excise Rules. The villagers, being primary stakeholders, were never consulted and their objections were ignored. The proposed site is merely 100 meters from the Baddheshwar Temple and adjacent to village Gothan, in clear violation of statutory distance norms and public safety requirements. Moreover, the order itself mandates an “objection-free” site, which stands disproved by violent opposition and assault, rendering the impugned order void, arbitrary, and unconstitutional. 8. Per contra, learned Deputy Advocate General appearing on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 5/State has vehemently opposed the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and has submitted that Gram Panchayat, Kikirda, after due deliberation, duly passed a resolution whereby it resolved to grant its consent to the State Government for establishment of a liquor shop within the village limits. It is further contended that the said decision was taken in the larger public interest with the sole objective of curbing and preventing the sale and purchase of illicit liquor, particularly in view of the fact that there exists no licensed liquor outlet in the adjoining areas, resulting in persistent public demand and the proliferation of illegal liquor trade. As such, the writ petition (PIL) deserves to be dismissed. 8 9. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents appended with writ petition. 10. The Courts should, prima facie, verify the credentials of the petitioner before entertaining a PIL. It is also well settled that the Courts before entertaining the PIL should ensure that the PIL is aimed at redressal of genuine public harm or public injury. The Courts should ensure the jurisdiction in public interest is invoked for genuine purposes by persons who have bona fide credentials and who do not seek to espouse or pursue any extraneous object. Otherwise, the jurisdiction in public interest can become a source of misuse by private persons seeking to pursue their own vested interests. The petition itself appears to be vague and sketchy and further from own showing of the petitioner, it appears to be personal interest of the petitioner as he is elected Panch of Ward No.19 (Kathi) of Gram Panchayat Kikirda, Janpad Panchayat Kikirda. 11. The Court cannot allow its process to be abused for oblique purposes, as was observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of State of Uttaranchal vs. Balwant Singh Chaufal & Others, reported in (2010) 3 SCC 402. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Balwant Singh Chaufal (supra) states as to how this important jurisdiction, i.e., Public Interest Litigation has been abused at Para 143 by observing as under: “143. Unfortunately, of late, it has been noticed that such an important jurisdiction which has been carefully carved out, created and nurtured with great care and caution by 9 the courts, is being blatantly abused by filing some petitions with oblique motives. We think time has come when genuine and bona fide public interest litigation must be encouraged whereas frivolous public interest litigation should be discouraged. In our considered opinion, we have to protect and preserve this important jurisdiction in the larger interest of the people of this country but we must take effective steps to prevent and cure its abuse on the basis of monetary and non-monetary directions by the courts.” 12. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and in view of the fact that Gram Panchayat, Kikirda, after due deliberation, duly passed a resolution granting its consent to the State Government for the establishment of a liquor shop within the village limits, we do not find any good ground to entertain the present public interest litigation. 13. Accordingly, the present PIL is dismissed. Security amount stands forfeited. Sd/- Sd/-/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Bablu