Chandigarh likely to go dry for three days in April
The city is set to witness a ‘triple-day dry spell’ in April with the Punjab and Haryana High Court ordering status quo on three petitions challenging the tendering process for liquor vends. The existing vends allotted under the previous Excise Policy will not operate beyond March 31, while the allocation of new ones through the tendering process will not be given effect to till April 3 – the next date of hearing in the case.
As the matter came up for preliminary hearing, the Bench of Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Vikas Suri took on record an assurance by the counsel for the petitioner-existing contractors that they would not operate liquor business at their vends beyond March 31.
The Bench orally observed that the allocation of even 10 vends to a single entity was against the provisions of the Competition Act, which is aimed at preventing practices that harm competition, promoting fair trade and protecting consumer interests.
The observations followed submission that a single family, their associates or directors of their firms had secured 87 vends, out of a total of 97 units. One of the petitions was filed through advocate Bikramjit Singh Patwalia, while senior advocates Chetan Mittal and Puneet Bali argued the matter before the court.
The Bench also took note of the petitioners’ plea to forthwith make amendments to the writ petitions for incorporating pleadings to challenging “the constitutionality of the relevant statute, as also the rules framed there under”.
The Chandigarh liquor vends tendering process for 2025-26 came under judicial scrutiny after the contractors alleged cartelization and non-compliance with the Excise Policy. One of the petitions contended that the tendering results revealed that more than 87 vends, out of a total of 97 units, had been allocated to just two or three individuals operating under different firms or through their relatives, associates and employees.
Challenging the notice inviting tender (NIT) dated March 13, petitioners M/S Kler Wines and another, through counsel Patwalia, argued that the entire process had been conducted in contravention of the prescribed rules. Seeking the quashing of the NIT, he asserted that the flawed process violated the Excise Policy 2025-26 and the Punjab Liquor License (Chandigarh Amendment) Rules, 2020.
Patwalia emphasised that policy restrictions clearly prohibited any individual, firm or company from acquiring more than 10 liquor vends to prevent cartelisation and monopolisation. However, the respondents had allowed certain individuals, through their family, associates and employees — forming a group of nearly 11 members — to bypass the restriction and gain disproportionate control over the liquor trade in the city.
Going into the legality of the issue, Patwalia pointed out that Clause 14 of the Excise Policy explicitly mandated that any entity forming a monopoly or cartel to dominate the liquor trade must be treated as a single entity and subjected to the maximum allocation limit of 10 vends. The Chandigarh Administration’s failure to enforce this provision had enabled private respondents to accumulate excessive control over liquor distribution.
It was further submitted that the tendering process had lacked transparency and was not conducted in accordance with the law. The Excise Policy was framed to ensure fair distribution of liquor vends and prevent monopolization. However, the tendering process allegedly allowed select individuals or entities to bid in proxy, defeating the very purpose of the policy.
