KRISHNA KUMAR NARULA ETC. versus THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR & ORS.

KRISHNA KUMAR NARULA ETC. versus THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR & ORS.

Dealing in liquor is 'business' under Article 19(1)(g), a citizen has a fundamental right to carry on such business subject to reasonable restrictions by the State. In the present case, refusal to renew licences based on bona fide inquiry regarding complaints and suitability of the locality does not constitute an arbitrary or unreasonable restriction. Section 22 of the Act (cancellation of licence) does not control Section 20 (issuance).

Parties
Appellant: Krishna Kumar Narula; Respondents: State of Jammu and Kashmir & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
01 March 1967
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Dismissal of Writ Petitions by Jammu and Kashmir High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Right to Carry on Business, Business in Liquor, Reasonable Restrictions Under Article 19, Licensing Discretion, Excise Law
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Right to Carry on Business Business in Liquor Reasonable Restrictions Under Article 19 Licensing Discretion Excise Law

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Krishna Kumar Narula

Appellant

State of Jammu and Kashmir & Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Dismissal of Writ Petitions by Jammu and Kashmir High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether dealing in liquor is 'business' within meaning of Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution
  2. 2 Whether the refusal to renew liquor licences infringes the fundamental right to carry on business
  3. 3 Whether the order of the Excise Commissioner was arbitrary or unreasonable

Ratio Decidendi

Dealing in liquor is 'business' under Article 19(1)(g), a citizen has a fundamental right to carry on such business subject to reasonable restrictions by the State. In the present case, refusal to renew licences based on bona fide inquiry regarding complaints and suitability of the locality does not constitute an arbitrary or unreasonable restriction. Section 22 of the Act (cancellation of licence) does not control Section 20 (issuance).

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed with costs