No Acts & Articles mentioned in this case
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Reserved On : 11.03.2026
Pronounced On : .03.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR .JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
and
WMP.(MD)Nos.24735,24736, 24737, 24825, 24827 & 24829 of 2025
WP.(MD)No.31562 of 2025
T.Sathiskumar ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State Government of Tamilnadu,
Rep.by its Secretary,
Department of Home,
Prohibition and Excise,
Fort St.George,
Chennai-6000 009.
2.The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise
Exhilagam Chepauk Chennai-600 005.
3.The Managing Director (TASMAC)
Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation
CMDA Building
Tower-II
Gandhi Irwin Bridge
1/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
Egmore Chennai - 600 008.
4.The District Collector
Madurai District Madurai.
5.The Superintendent of Police
Superintendent of Police Office
MoontruMavadi
K.Pudur Madurai-625 007
6.The Assistant Commissioner
Prohibition and Excise Department
Collectorate
Madurai
Madurai District.
7.The Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited
Rep. by its District Manager
TASMAC Madurai North
Madurai - Rameshwaram Highway
Kalugar Kadai Vilakku
Manalur
Thiruppuvanam Taluk
Sivagangai District.
8.Paulpandian
Rep. by its Secretary
PONS Recreation Club (R.S.No.202/2B1)
D.No. 122/6
Palamedu Main Road
Thandalai Village
Vadipatti Taluk
Madurai District. ... Respondents
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records relating to
2/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
the impugned license granted by the second respondent in
R.Dis.No.P&E.2(1)/1194/2025 dated 07.10.2025 and quash the same
as illegal.
For Petitioner: Mr.M.Mohaboob Athif,
for Mr.T.Palanichamy.
For R1, R2, R4
& R6 : Mr.P.T.Thiraviam.
Government Advocate
For R3 & R7 : Mr.H.Arumugam
For R5 : Mr.K.Sanjai Ghandhi,
Government Advocate
For R8 : Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy,
Senior Counsel,
for M/S.Roy and Roy Associates.
WP.(MD)No.31655 of 2025
P.Sonai Muthu ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Commissioner
Prohibition and Excise Department
Chepauk Chennai 600 005
2.The District Collector
The Collectorate
Madurai
Madurai District.
3/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
3.The Superintendent of Police
Madurai District
Alagarkovil Madurai.
4.The Managing Director
TASMAC
No.8 CMDA Tower 4th Floor
Gandhi Irin Road
Egmore Chennai 600 008
5.The Commissioner
Allanganallur Panchayat Union
Allanganallur Madurai District.
6.The Special Officer
Thandalai Village Panchayat
Allanganallur Madurai District.
7.M/s.Pons Recreation Club-Thandalai
Rep by its Secretary
P.Paulpandian
S/o.S.Ponnaiyah
No.12/19 Roja Street
Bethaniyapuram
Madurai.
8.Kanagaraj
TASMAC Supervisor
No.12/19
Roja Street
Bethaniyapuram
Madurai. ... Respondents
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records relating to
proceedings of the first respondent made in R.Dis.No.P and E.
4/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
2(1)/1194/2025 dated 07.10.2025 and quash the same and pass such
further or other orders as this Court.
For Petitioner: Mr.R.Murali
For R1, R2,
& R6 : Mr.P.T.Thiraviam.
Government Advocate
For R3 : Mr.K.Sanjai Ghandhi,
Government Advocate
For R4 : Mr.H.Arumugam
For R5 : Mr.J.Ashok,
Additional Government Pleader.
For R7 & R8 : Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy,
Senior Counsel,
for M/S.Roy and Roy Associates.
COMMON ORDER
(Order of this Court was delivered by M.JOTHIRAMAN J.)
Under assail is the order passed by the Commissioner of
Prohibition and Excise granting license in R.Dis.No.P and E.
2(1)/1194/2025 dated 07.10.2025. Two writ petitions have been
filed in the name of Public Interest Litigation.
5/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
2.It is the case of the writ petitioner in WP.(MD)No.31562 of
2025 that his locality falls within Alanganallur Union, Vadipatti
Takuk, Madurai District. The said union consists 37 village
panchayat and 2 town panchayat and is having a population of
approximately 1,30,000/- people. From the year 2020, the village
people, especially women had conducted several agitations and
protest over the establishment of TASMAC and other private bars
in the said union and had successfully prevented the opening of
any above shops in the said union. Alanganallur union is revered
worldwide during the month of January towards Jallikattu and
people from several parts of the country are visiting the said
union. Alanganallur and Palamedu village does not have any
liquor shop till date. It is came to the knowledge of the petitioner
that the Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise Department,
Chennai had granted FL.2 license to the eighth respondent/
Paulpandian to set up a private recreation club in violation of the
rules and defeating the cultural values of the union.
6/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
3.It is the case of the writ petitioner in WP.(MD)No.31655 of
2025 that Alanganallur panchayat union consists 36 villages. In
none of the village, there is no TASMAC outlet is functioning for
the past five years. More particularly, Thandalai village,
Pudupatti village and Mettupatti village, the village panchayats
already passed resolution prohibiting the opening of TASMAC
outlet by the Government. Alanganallur is the Town panchayat
and in which also there is no TASMAC outlet is functioning. The
Government is granting FL2 license for handling for liquors by the
clubs in the course of their recreational activities. The 7
th
respondent club is registered under the Societies Act. They have
obtained FL2 license from the Commissioner, Prohibition and
Excise Department, on 07.10.2025. There are restrictions in
granting FL2 license for newly formed societies. In order to
overcome such situation, the 8
th
respondent and the Secretary of
the 7
th
respondent club adopted a novel method and thereby,
purchased the society, which is earlier functioned in the name of
NDR Vaigai Sports Recreation Helping Club and changed the
7/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
name as Pon's Recreation Club, Thandalai. In fact, respondents 7
& 8 are residents of Bethaniyapuram, Madurai and they are not
resident of Thandalai village. On 29.01.2025 by changing the
name, they obtained a certificate from the District Registrar,
Madurai North. The third respondent Police Department withour
proper verification had issued no objection certificate. The said
certificate itself discloses non application of mind, since it discuss
about Leo Recreation Club. The 7
th
respondent club itself is only a
name sake club without actually functioning and without any
proper members. By fabrication of documents, the society was
registered and license was obtained. The impugned license issued
by the Commissioner, Prohibition and Excise Department,
Chennai dated 07.10.2025 is illegal, unlawful and against the
principal of natural justice.
4.Since both the writ petitions have been filed as against the
issuance of FL.2 license dated 07.10.2025, both writ petitions are
disposed of by this common order.
8/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
5.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in WP.
(MD)No.31562 of 2025 would submit that the eighth respondent
club had earlier functioned as NDR Vaigai Sports Recreation
Helping Club and had changed its name as Pons Recreation club,
Thandalai only in the year 2025, with a malafide intention of
selling liquor for a private gain and against the rules. Pons
recreation club was presently functioning only from the present
year and as such, it is not possible for it to comply with the
conditions enumerated in Rule 19(2) of the Tamil Nadu Liquor
(License and Permit) Rules, 1981 [herein after referred as 'the
Rules']. As per the said Rules, it should be functioning for more
than three years whereas, the 8
th
respondent had earlier been
functioning somewhere else and wanted to shift now at the
present place, would not satisfy the aforesaid condition. The
Commissioner, Prohibition and Excise Department had granted
the impugned license, without considering the Rule 19(1), which
stipulates that a general enquiry should be conducted with regard
9/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
to two aspects, ie., the local needs and public interest shall not
suffer. Though resolutions have been passed by the village
panchayat on two occasions, ie., on 05.11.2024 and 11.10.2025
objecting the opening of TASMAC and private liquor shop within
the premises of village, without considering the same, the
Commissioner, Prohibition and Excise Department issued the
impugned license. Further, he would submit that the members of
the eighth respondent club are not belonging to the petitioner's
village and they have collectively decided to have a liquor
vending zone in the petitioner's village in an arbitrary and
uncharitable manner. The eighth respondent has shifted their
office elsewhere to the petitioner's village only with an intention
to sell liquor, which is nothing but, proprietary and against the
Rule 17 of the Rules and warrants interference by this Court. To
strengthen his contention, the learned counsel has relied upon the
judgment of the Division Bench of this Court reported in 2014 (4)
CTC 721, M.A.Sudhagar Vs. The Government of Tamil Nadu
rep.by its Principal Secretary and others to show that the condition
10/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
stipulated in Rule 19(A) is concerned, there is nothing on record to
show that the Licensing Authority satisfied itself about the same
and the license issued by the authorities is cancelled. He has also
relied on yet another judgment of this Court in WP.(MD)No.8038
of 2019 etc., batch dated 18.08.2025 to show that the activities of
the recreation club, genuinely of the objections approved in the by-
laws under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975, all are
to be monitored closely by the Police authorities, authorities of the
Registration Department and Prohibition and Excise Department,
so as to ensure the right to life of the residents in the locality and
in order to maintain public health by the State.
6.The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner in
WP.(MD)No.31655 of 2025 would submit that there is no alcohol
selling unit for the past five years, in and around 18 villages and
the village panchayat also passed uniformed resolution by
objecting the opening of the TASMAC shop and other private
liquor shops. By granting the impugned license, the objection of
11/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
the entire villages is indirectly thrown away by the authorities.
The respondent club itself is only a name sake club, without actual
functioning and without proper members. The respondent club is
registered under the Societies Act and there are restrictions in
granting FL2 license for newly formed societies. In order to
overcome such situation, the respondent club adopted a novel
method and thereby, purchased a society which is earlier
functioned in the name of NDR Vaigai Sports and Recreation
Helping Club and changed the name as Pons Recreation club,
Thandalai. More over, there is no such recreation club is
functioning at Thandalai village as claimed by the respondent
club. The 8
th
respondent in WP.(MD)No.31655 of 2025 is an
employee of the TASMAC and he is indirectly doing FL2 business
in various places in Madurai. The Police Department had issued
no objection certificate dated 12.05.2025 in favour of the
respondent club, without proper verification and in a hurried
manner. The certificate issued by the Police Department itself
discloses non-application of mind, since is discuss about Leo
12/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
recreation club. For even opening TASMAC outlet, village
panchyat views are obtained, but, in the case on hand, without
considering the objection of village panchayat, the impugned
license was granted. Therefore, the impugned license issued by
the Commissioner, Prohibition and Excise Department is illegal,
unlawful and against the principal of natural justice.
7.The learned Government Advocate appearing for the
District Collector, Madurai and the Commissioner, Prohibition
and Excise Department would submit that initially the 8
th
respondent after obtaining no objection certificate from the Police
Department, had approached the Assistant Commissioner, Excise
Madurai. In turn, the office of Assistant Commissioner, Excise
had forwarded a proposal dated 20.06.2025 recommending FL2
license as per established procedures and based on the applicable
rules. Thereafter, the Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise
issued FL2 license to the 8
th
respondent club. He would further
submits that the proposal of the 8
th
respondent club has been
13/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
registered in the year 2009 in the name of NDR Vaigai Sports and
Recreation Helping club and they have duly changed their name
as Pons recreation club, Thandalai. The said facts have been
wrongly represented as if the club is only one year old and
therefore, there is no violation as per Rule 19B(2) of the Rules. The
proposal of the 8
th
respondent has been forwarded for license only
based on the proper verification of the norms. The report of the
office of the District Superintendent of Police also obtained. In the
report, it has been stated that there are no disturbances to the
public or objections from the common public. Initially there was
no objections were also received when the proposal was under the
process. Only after issuance of license, there was an agitation.
The authorities have only performed their bounden duty while
processing the application and there is no violation as alleged by
the writ petitioners. Until the issuance of FL2 license, there has
been no objection or finding from competent authority that there is
possibility of law and order related issues for functioning of
recreation club therein.
14/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
8.The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent
club would submit that the respondent club is registered under
Tamil Nadu Societies Act, 1975 and it has been registered in the
year 2009 in the name of NDR Vaigai Sports and Recreation
Helping Club and thereafter, they had changed their name as
Pons recreation club, Thandalai, by way of proceedings of the
concerned authority, dated 29.01.2025. The writ petitioners have
filed these writ petitions as if the club is only for one year old and
therefore, there is a violation as per Rule 19(2)of the Rule. The
District Superintendent of Police has issued no objections
certificate after due enquiry and found that there are no
disturbances to the public or any objection from the common
public. There are FL2 licensed recreation club situated in
Sikkandar Chavadi and Pothumbu, which are only 3 kms from the
proposed recreation club, Thandalai. Further more, until issuance
of FL2 license, there has been no objection or finding from the Law
Enforcement Agency. Therefore, the authorities have only
15/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
performed their bounden duty and properly issued the license and
there is no violation as alleged by the writ petitioners. The learned
Senior Counsel would further submit that the allegations levelled
by the writ petitioners in their affidavit are question of fact and the
same cannot be adjudicated before the writ jurisdiction. To
strengthen his contention, the learned Senior Counsel has relied
upon the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in
R.Muralidaran & 6 others Vs. The District Registrar, South
Madras and another reported in 2008 2 LW 75 to show that writ
would not lie against any Ministerial Act performed by the
Registrar of the Societies under the provisions of Tamil Nadu
Societies Act, the District Registrar can only call for further
information and he is not entitled to adjudicate any dispute. The
writ petitioners, if at all aggrieved by the issuance of license, they
can very well preferred an appeal before the competent authority.
9.The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing
for the fifth respondent in WP.(MD)No.31655 of 2025, on
16/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
instructions from the Block Development Officer (East Union),
Alanganallur, would submit that in Alanganallur panchayat
union, there is no alcohol vending zone. The village panchayat
has already passed a resolution not to open the TASMAC outlet
within their limit and people are objecting to open alcohol selling
unit.
10.We have considered the submissions made on either side
and perused the records carefully.
11.Present writ petitions have been filed aggrieved over the
issuance of FL2 license dated 07.10.2025 permitting Pons
recreation club, Thandalai to set up a bar and the said license has
been assailed on various grounds . The Pons recreation club is a
Society registered under the Tamil Nadu Registration of Societies
Act, 1975 and has been registered in the year 2009, in the name of
NDR Vaigai Sports Recreation Helping Club with Registration No.
55/2009. Thereafter, they had changed their name as Pons
recreation club, Thandalai, by way of proceedings of the District
17/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
Registrar, dated 29.01.2025. According to the writ petitioners, the
club is the registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration
Act, 1975 and as per the Rule 19B(2) of the Rule, the license would
have been issued only after three years for Society exists. In the
present case, club is only one year old. Secondly, The
Superintendent of Police, Madurai in his proceedings dated
22.05.2025 has granted permission suppressing the setting up of
the club. Mere perusal of the aforesaid proceedings would go to
show that two different clubs's names have been mentioned and it
is not clear as to whom they have issued no objection certificate.
Thirdly, Alanganallur panchayat union, in which the club is
situated, comprised 36 villages and in Thandalai village,
Pudupatti village and Mettupatti village, the village panchayats
have already passed resolution prohibiting the opening of
TASMAC outlet. Yet another contention is that as per Rule 19(A),
on receipt of application, the licensing authority should verify the
particulars furnished in the application. In the case of application
of all kinds, he shall satisfy himself in general after due enquiry
18/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
that the local needs justify the grant of the licence and that public
interest shall not suffer by the grant of the licence applied for and
that the privilege is not likely to be misused.
12.It is to be noted that numerous recreation clubs are
registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975.
In the State of Tamil Nadu, retail vending liquor shops are being
run only by TASMAC, a fully State-owned Corporation and no
license has been granted to the private individuals to run retail
liquor shops. Since licenses are not granted to run liquor shops,
the private individuals are registering Recreation Clubs under
Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975 and by obtaining FL2
license, in the name of recreation club, they are running liquor
shops also, which is causing inconvenience to the residents
residing in that locality and road users.
13.It is pertinent to mentionthat Section 3(1) of the Tamil
Nadu Societies Registration Act provides that, subject to the
19/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
limitations contained in Section 3(2), any society formed with
objects such as the promotion of education, literature, science,
religion, charity, social reform, art, crafts, cottage industries,
athletics, sports (including indoor games), recreation, public
health, social service, cultural activities, the diffusion of useful
knowledge, or any other useful object within the legislative
competence of the State Legislature, as may be prescribed, is
eligible for registration under the Act. Section 4 of Tamil Nadu
Societies Registration Act stipulates the requirement of
compulsory registration. Section 4(1) states that every society
formed on or after the commencement of the Act, having objects
referred to in Section 3, and which either consists of not less than
20 members or has an annual gross income or expenditure of not
less than ten thousand rupees in any financial year after such
commencement, shall be registered within the prescribed period.
Section 37 of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act empowers
the Registrar to cancel the registration of a society upon
completion of an inquiry under Section 36, if he is satisfied that the
20/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
society has contravened the provisions of the Act or the rules, is
insolvent or likely to become insolvent, or is conducting its
business fraudulently or in a manner inconsistent with its by-laws
or stated objects. Section 38 of the Tamil Nadu Societies
Registration Act deals with cancellation of registration on account
of unlawful activities. Section 38(1) provides that where it appears
to the Registrar that a registered society is carrying on, or
permitting to be carried on, any unlawful activity within its
premises, he may conduct an inquiry, and for this purpose, he
shall have the same powers as those specified in sub-sections (6),
(7), and (8) of Section 36. Section 38(2) states that if, upon such
inquiry, the Registrar is satisfied that the society has engaged in or
permitted unlawful activities, he shall, after giving reasonable
notice and considering any representations made by the society,
cancel its registration by order and communicate the same
forthwith. The Explanation of Section 38 clarifies that an activity
shall be deemed unlawful if it constitutes an offence punishable
under any law in force at the relevant time.
21/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
14.It is to be noted that the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act,1937
has been entrusted for prohibition of the manufacture, sale and
consumption of intoxicating liquors and drugs in the State of
Tamil Nadu. As per Section 4(A) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition
Act, 1937, Whoever is found in a state of intoxication in any
public place and whoever, not having been permitted to consume
any liquor or intoxicating drug in pursuance of this Act, is found
in a state of intoxication in any private place, shall be punished
with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months
or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees.
15.The writ petitioners have stated that two resolution have
been passed by the village panchayat on two occasions, ie, on
05.11.2024 and 11.10.2025, objecting the opening TASMAC and
private liquor shop. When that being so, the Commissioner,
Prohibition and Excise Department, ought to have considered the
objections of the villagers and have refrained from granting the
22/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
license as the same is affecting the public at large.
16.It is relevant to mention that the Village Panchayat and
the Grama Sabha, constitutional bodies which are recognized
under Part IX of the Constitution of India under Articles 243A,
243G, and the Eleventh Schedule through the 73rd Constitutional
Amendment Act of 1992. Article 243A confers authority on the
Grama Sabha to function as a body of the people, enabling them to
participate directly in decision making on matters that affect the
villagers. Article 243G empowers Panchayats as institutions of
self-government to prepare plans and implement schemes for
economic development and social justice. The resolution passed
by the Grama Sabha or the Village Panchayat, reflects the public
needs that the Panchayat is duty to protect, particularly with
respect to public health, morality, and welfare of the community.
Further, the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994, provides for the
conduct of Grama Sabha meetings and enables Village Panchayats
to pass resolutions reflecting the needs, priorities, and collective
23/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
will of the local community.
17.It is to be noted that consumption of liquor is an
individual choice of a person. However, such liquor shops
causing nuisance or posing threat to the residents of that locality
must be looked into. There is no specific clause / objective in the
by-laws approved by the Registrar for selling of liquor by
obtaining FL2 licence from the Prohibition and Excise Department.
In the absence of any such clause in the by-laws, which are to be
approved under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975,
selling of liquor in the Recreation Clubs cannot be permitted and it
is a violation of the by-laws of the Societies.
18.It is relevant to refer the Rules 2(viii), 17(a), 19(b)(2) and
19(a) of the Tamil Nadu Liquor (License and Permit) Rules which
are extracted as under:-
2(viii).“ Licence “ includes the privileges
24/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
granted under Section 17-C of the Act for the sale by
retail of Indian-made Foreign Spirits ** and foreign
liquor ** issued under these rules, and “ licence
holder”, means the holder of such a licence.
17 (a) Kinds of licences— The licences issued
under these rules shall be of the following kinds, for the
purposes specified in the Act.
(A) Licences for liquor used for consumption The
licences issued under this class are for privilege of sale
of Indian Made Foreign Spirits in retail under section
17-C of the Act or for sale of foreign liquor.
F.L. 1.Licence for the grant of privilege of retail
sale of bottled Indian – made foreign spirits or sale of
foreign liquor.
F.L.2.Licence for possession of liquor by a non-
proprietory club for supply to members.
19(A).Conditions to be satisfied before a privilege is
granted and the licence is issued and the procedure to be
followed in dealing with applications:- (A) On receipt of
the application, the licensing authority shall verify the
particulars furnished in the application. In the case of
application of all kinds, he shall satisfy himself in
general after due enquiry:- (i) that the local needs
25/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
justify the grant of the licence; and (ii) that public
interest shall not suffer by the grant of the licence
applied for and that the privilege is not likely to be
misused.
19(B)(2).In the case of an application for a
licence in Form F.L.2.- (i) that the club in respect of
which the licence has been applied for is of a non-
proprietory character functioning for more than 3 years
and 2 [ (ii) that atleast 50 of the members of the club
have signified their willingness to obtain liquor from
the said club or that the club should have functioned
with a bar in the pre-prohibition days and have on its
rolls not less than 50 persons.
19.It is also to be noted that Alanganallur Union consisting
of 36 villages, wherein there is no liquor shop is functioning and
the village panchayat passed resolution on 05.11.2024 and
11.10.2025 objecting the opening of TASMAC and private liquor
shop. However, without considering the same, FL2 license was
granted. The official respondents failed to consider that the 8
th
26/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
respondent club had earlier functioned as NDR Vaigai Sports
Recreation Helping Club and had changed its name as Pons
recreation club, Thandalai, only in the year 2025 and as such, it is
not possible for it to comply with the condition stipulated in 19(2)
of the Rules. As per the said Rules it should be functioning for
more than three years. In the instant case, the club had earlier
been functioning somewhere else and wanted to shift now at the
present place would not satisfy the above condition. The District
Superintendent of Police, Madurai District issued no objection
certificate without application of mind. The impugned license had
granted without considering 19B(1) of the Rules which stipulates
that a general enquiry should be conducted with regard to the two
aspects, ie., local needs and public interest shall not suffer. In the
instant case, there is no public need as the village had restriction
with regard to establishing liquor shop in its union. On the other
hand the public interest was not at all considered. The Hon'ble
Division Bench of this Court in WP.(MD)No.8038 of 2019 etc.,
batch dated 18.08.2025 had held that clause regarding number of
27/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
members should be incorporated in the by-laws. In the instant
case, the said exercise had not been made by the club.
20.It is relevant to refer paragraph No.8 of the counter
affidavit filed by the District Collector, Madurai, wherein, it has
been specifically mentioned the localities where FL2 license have
already been granted, which reads as under:-
8. It is most respectfully submitted that the
claim of the Writ Petitioner that there are no FL - 2
license within a circumference of 15 Kms from
Alanganallur for the past 5 years is not completely
true. It is pertinent to note that there are FL-2 licensed
Recreation Clubs in Sikkandar Chavadi and Pothumbu
which are only about 3 kms from the proposed FL-2 at
Thandalai. Furthermore until the issuance of FL-2
license there has been no objection or finding from the
competent authority/ law enforcement agency that
there is possibility of law and order related issues for
functioning of a recreational club therein. Therefore
the authorities have only performed their bounden
duty while processing the application and there is no
violation as alleged by the Writ Petitioner.
28/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
21.It is to be noted that decision of the Hon'ble Division
Bench of this Court in the case of M.A.Sudhagar vs. The
Government of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its Principal Secretary and
others reported in 2014 (4) CTC 721, wherein this Court
elaborately dealt the issuance of FL2 license and it was held that
on receipt of application for grant of FL2 licence, the Licensing
Authority should satisfy in general, after due enquiry, find three
preliminary conditions are satisfied, namely (i) that the local needs
justify the grant of Licence; (ii) that public interest shall not suffer
by the grant of licence applied for and (iii) that the privilege is not
likely to be misused. Further, in the case of the Tamil Nadu State
Marketing Corporation Ltd., Vs. R.M.Shah and others reported in
2010 (2) CWC 337, this Court held that any person who is
deprived of peaceful life on account of the nuisance created by a
liquor shop would challenge the action in locating the shop in a
residential or semi-residential locality as offending the right of life
guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India
29/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
notwithstanding the fact that the liquor shop satisfies the distance
criteria. By applying the law laid down in the aforesaid judgments,
in the instant case on hand, we are of the view that the licensing
authority has failed to consider the following aspects:-
i)the local needs justify the grant of license,
ii)the public interest shall not suffer by the grant of license
applied,
iii)the resolution passed by the village panchayat and union
panchayat and
iv)the conditions enumerated under Rule 19 of the Tamil
Nadu Liquor (License and Permit) Rules. Thus, the impugned
license has been issued without considering the conditions and
procedures stipulated under 19 of the Rules and the same is liable
to be set aside.
24.In the result, the writ petitions in WP.(MD)Nos.31562 &
31655 of 2025 are allowed and the impugned FL2 license in
30/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
R.Dis.No.P&E.2(1)/1194/2025 dated 07.10.2025 is set aside. There
shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petitions are closed.
(N.S.K., J.) & (M.J.R., J.)
.03.2026
NCC :Yes / No
Index :Yes / No
GNS
To
1.The Secretary,
Department of Home,
Prohibition and Excise,
Fort St.George,
Chennai-6000 009.
2.The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise
Exhilagam Chepauk Chennai-600 005.
3.The Managing Director (TASMAC)
Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation
CMDA Building
Tower-II
Gandhi Irwin Bridge
Egmore Chennai - 600 008.
4.The District Collector
Madurai District Madurai.
31/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
5.The Superintendent of Police
Superintendent of Police Office
MoontruMavadi
K.Pudur Madurai-625 007
6.The Assistant Commissioner
Prohibition and Excise Department
Collectorate
Madurai
Madurai District.
7.The Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited
Rep. by its District Manager
TASMAC Madurai North
Madurai - Rameshwaram Highway
Kalugar Kadai Vilakku
Manalur
Thiruppuvanam Taluk
Sivagangai District.
8.The Commissioner
Prohibition and Excise Department
Chepauk Chennai 600 005
2.The District Collector
The Collectorate
Madurai
Madurai District.
9.The Superintendent of Police
Madurai District
Alagarkovil
Madurai.
32/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
10.The Managing Director
TASMAC
No.8 CMDA Tower 4th Floor
Gandhi Irin Road
Egmore
Chennai 600 008
11.The Commissioner
Allanganallur Panchayat Union
Allanganallur
Madurai District.
12.The Special Officer
Thandalai Village Panchayat
Allanganallur
Madurai District.
33/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 & 31655 of 2025
N.SATHISH KUMAR ,J.
and
M.JOTHIRAMAN , J.
GNS
Pre-Delivery Judgement made in
WP.(MD)Nos.31562 &
31655 of 2025
.03.2026
34/34 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Legal Notes
Add a Note....