Rajnikant S/O Daluramji Borele v. State Of Maharashtra, Through Its Secretary, Dept. Of Home Mumbai And ORS

306pil10.16 1/1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR P.I.l. No.10 of 2016 (Rajnikant s/o. Daluramji Borele .vs. State and Ors.) =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Ms Rani Nitnaware, Adv. h/f. Mr.M.P.Kariya, Adv. for the petitioner.

Mrs.Geeta Tiwari, AGP for respondent nos. 1 to 4.

CORAM

: B.R.GAVAI & V.M.DESHPANDE, JJ.

DATE : 30.6.2016.

Heard.

In the present Public Interest Litigation, a direction is sought to respondent nos. 1 to 3 to immediately impose total prohibition of sale, manufacture and consumption of liquor in Yavatmal district.

Whether to impose a prohibition in a particular area or not is exclusively within the domain of the Executive. The Court cannot encroach upon the discretion of the Executive in taking a policy decision in that regard. P.I.L. No.68 of 2015 seeking the similar relief is already dismissed by us vide order dt.4.2.2016. In that view of the matter, we do not find that any case is made out for interference. Hence, the present P.I.L. is dismissed. No order as to costs.

JUDGE JUDGE *jaiswal