Recreational Clubs Selling Liquor Becoming 'Nuisance', Govt Allowing It Because Owners Are Influential/ Politicians: Madras High Court

The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice G Arul Murugan noted that these clubs were becoming a nuisance for the people living near them. The bench also noted that the government was not taking any action against the clubs since in many instances, the clubs were owned by influential persons.

“These Recreation Clubs are becoming greater nuisance to the nearby residents and to the society at large. These Recreation Clubs are circumventing the TASMAC Shops fully owned by a Corporation of the State Government. However, the Government authorities are paving way for these private individuals to operate retail liquor vending shops and allow them to sell liquor to the members and non-members. Since the owners of these Recreation Clubs are either belonging to political parties or influential persons in that locality, the corrupt activities in these Recreation Clubs cannot be overruled,” the court observed.

The bench has directed the Inspector General of Registration Department to ensure that the clubs selling liquor have a specific clause in their byelaws for selling of liquor by obtaining FL2 licence, which must be approved by due verification and in accordance with the law. The bench said that if a specific clause was not available in the byelaws, the registration of the club could be cancelled.

The court also directed the Director General of Police to ensure that periodical surprise inspections are conducted at the clubs and their licenses, documents, etc. are verified. The bench added that if any illegality was identified, the offenders could be prosecuted and the criminal action taken by the authorities must be intimated to the concerned District Registrar for initiating action under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act 1975. On receipt of information, the concerned authorities will conduct inspections in Recreational clubs and verify the validity of the FL2 licenses.

“The activities of these Recreation Clubs, genuinity of the objectives 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 that locality and in order to maintain public health by the State, which is a mandate under the Constitution of India and the fundamental rights ensured to the citizens in general,” the court said.

The court was hearing a batch of petitions seeking either to close down recreational clubs or to not grant the FL-2 license for running liquor shops in the name of recreational clubs.

The court noted that since there was a prohibition in selling alcohol by individuals in Tamil Nadu, private individuals were registering recreational clubs under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act and by obtaining the FL-2 license, they were running liquor shops which was causing inconvenience to the residents in the locality. The court also observed that even though the authorities are aware of the facts, they are remaining a mute spectator since the club owners are either political persons or influential persons in the locality.

The court also noted that the byelaws of the recreational clubs did not specify anything about selling liquor in retail by obtaining FL2 licenses.

The court added that though such illegalities were being committed inside the recreational clubs, no action was being taken which would lead to the presumption that either corrupt activities were going on or that the police and other officials were hand in glove with the influential persons owning the clubs.

While the court agreed that consumption of liquor was an individual's personal choice, the court added that when such liquor shops cause nuisance to the public or cause threat to the residents of the locality, appropriate action should be taken by conducting surprise inspections and verifying the licenses.

The court also observed that the State was bound to maintain the health of public and thus, in the name of recreational clubs, retail selling of liquor could not be allowed.

“In the name of Recreation Clubs, retail selling of liquor cannot be allowed in a routine manner so as to infringe the rights of the residents of the locality and affecting the public health. Maintaining public health is the duty of the State Government under the Constitution. “Public Health” is the State subject and therefore, the State Government is expected to regulate the activities in public interest and for maintenance of “Public Health” in the society as enumerated in the Constitution and under various laws,” the court said.

Thus, the court issued directions to ensure that recreational clubs registered under the Societies Registration Act were not merely selling liquor, affecting the health of the public.

Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. K. P. Satheeshkumar, Mr. K. Rajeshwaran, Mr. T. Lenin Kumar, Mr. P. Arun Jayatram, Mr. K. Kannan for Mr. N. Murugesan, Mr. S. Bharathi, Mr. D. Senthil, Mr. M. Rajarajan, Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramanian

Counsel for Respondent: Mr. M. Ajmal Khan Additional Advocate General, assisted by Mr. P. Thilakkumar Government Pleader, Mr. H. Arumugam Standing Counsel, Mr. T. Senthil Kumar Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr. T. Bashyam, Mr.K.Gokul, Mr. T. Lajapathy Roy, Senior Counsel for Mr.M.Mahaboob Fazil, Mr. Veera Kathiravan Additional Advocate General, Mr.S.Sivanesan Standing Counsel, Mr.K.R.Kishore Ram for M/s.R.B.Associates, Mr.K.Rajesh , Mr.K.Sivabalan, Mr.T.Ramesh

Case Title: Perumal v. The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 286

Case No: W.P.(MD) No.8038 of 2019 etc. batch