The Excise Department of Rajasthan has taken stringent action in the state capital, sealing a total of 27 liquor shops. This move has sparked significant backlash from license holders, who are accusing the authorities of acting arbitrarily and not following due process.
Reasons Behind the Sealing of Shops
According to officials, the crackdown was based on specific violations. Nine shops were sealed for failing to clear their outstanding license fees and other statutory charges, which include security deposits. The remaining 18 outlets present a more complex case. Officials state that these shops, while meeting their minimum sales guarantee obligations for Rajasthan Made Liquor (RML) and Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) until December, were sealed for a different reason.
An excise official explained that the action followed repeated defaults. "These shops failed to fulfil guarantee conditions, did not deposit basic licence fees and other dues, and in several cases did not lift liquor as per the required ratio," he said. The prescribed purchase proportion, a rule under the excise policy, was reportedly not adhered to by these 18 outlets.
License Holders Mount a Strong Defence
The shop owners have strongly contested the department's decision, calling it disproportionate. They argue that with three months still left in the financial year, the rules primarily provide for penalties at this stage, not the extreme step of sealing premises. "Suspending licences and sealing shops when penalty provisions exist is against the spirit of the rules," stated one operator.
Operators of several sealed outlets put forward a counter-claim. They asserted that at least 18 of the sealed shops had purchased liquor worth more than the stipulated guarantee amount from government depots and had paid all applicable taxes in full. Their sales from April to December 2023 had reportedly exceeded the targets set for the first three quarters.
"These shops already achieved and, in some cases, surpassed their assigned targets for the first 9 months. We requested that the excess achievement be adjusted against the fourth-quarter targets from January to March, but the department refused and proceeded to seal the outlets," explained an aggrieved operator.
Unresolved Conflict and Future Implications
The situation has created a standoff between the excise department and the license holders. The department maintains it acted against clear and repeated violations of the excise rules. On the other hand, the shop owners feel penalized despite fulfilling their core sales obligations and are demanding a more lenient interpretation of the purchase ratio rule, especially given their performance in the first three quarters.
This dispute highlights the tension between regulatory enforcement and business operations within the state's liquor trade. The outcome could set a precedent for how similar cases are handled in the future, especially concerning the balance between imposing penalties and taking severe action like sealing establishments.
