Re: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi DIKTATOR ?
Good response, Ram!
Thanks
RB
- Original Message -
From:
Ram Sarangapani
To: Rajen Barua
Cc: assam@assamnet.org ; Chan Mahanta
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 3:52
PM
Subject: Re: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New
Desi DIKTATOR ?
If I am not mistaken, this article 47 came directly from the British
Constitution. In fact, similar articles exist in most constitutions (regarding
public health). Remember, this was 1951 or when this was done.
Now, if the legislators don't like the article, they can pass an
amendment.
>This is irreligious
Law
What has religion got to do with
it?
>Why the 'desi's will
have to think conservative?
>Why we make Laws
knowing fully well that we cannot adopt it?
Why point only to Desis? Was the US conservative in
1919 - a prohibition amendment which lasted for nearly 15 years?
When they repealed it, can we ask the question as to
why they made laws which they cannot adopt? (they found that out only after 15
years)
IMHO: There are many laws that are NOT good (in
all constitutions). Before the Mitakshara law, property could only be
inherited by sons and not daughters.
The point I am making is that laws are usually made
taking into consideration of the times and customs at the time they were
enacted. Only the test of time reverses these things.
A good example is the famous case of a gay couple
from Texas who broke Texas' sodomy laws. The US Supreme Court last month
struck it down and declared that the Texas law was unconstitutional (as
piercing the veil of privacy - not sodomy). That Texas law (stupid as it was)
existed as a Texas law ever since Texas was a state.
So, unjust and stupid laws change as times change -
when people see them as not relevant any more or just plain
unjust.
--Ram
On 5/3/06, Rajen
Barua <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Article 47--Duty of
the State to raise the level of nutrition and the standard of living and to
improve public health
The State shall regard the raising of the level
of nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the improvement of
public health as among its primary duties and, in particular, the State
shall endeavour to bring about
prohibition of the consumption except for medicinal purposes
of intoxicating drinks and of
drugs which are injurious to health
This is irreligious
Law.
Is Xaj Pani (Rice Beer)
injurious to health?
Is wine injurious to
health?
Why the 'desi's will have
to think conservative?
Why we make Laws knowing
fully well that we cannot adopt it?
Why the 'desis' have to
prove that they are hypocites?
What is in the 'desi'
mind?
RB
- Original Message -
From: Ram Sarangapani
To: Rajen Barua
Cc: assam@assamnet.org ; Chan Mahanta
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 1:12
PM
Subject: Re: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the
New Desi DIKTATOR ?
This is democracy at work. Why are we blaming the SC?
The people elect their representatives, who in turn enact laws. The
Indian Supreme Court ONLY interprets the constitution. If people (read
legislators) don't want it, they can always pass an amendment.
BTW: In the US, prohibition was passed into law thru an amendment,
and upheld by the US Supreme Court in (around) 1919. Another amendment to
the constitution repealed it and passed scrutinity of the Court.
So, lets not blame the SC for doing what they are supposed to be
doing.
Here is Article 47 of the Indian Constitution.
Article 47--Duty of
the State to raise the level of nutrition and the standard of living and
to improve public health
The State shall regard the raising of the
level of nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the
improvement of public health as among its primary duties and, in
particular, the State shall endeavour to bring about prohibition of the
consumption except for medicinal purposes of intoxicating drinks and of
drugs which are injurious to health .
--Ram
On 5/3/06, Rajen
Barua <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>The Supreme Court has asked the central
and state >governments to take steps to achieve the goal of total
prohibition of >liquor as enshrined in Article
47 of the constitution under the >Directive Principles
of State Policy.
I think the power comes
from above.
What is Article
47?
Who makes these
articles?
Re: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi DIKTATOR ?
Title: Re: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi DIKTATOR ? Ram: >>I know the Indian SC does a whole lot more: Some for the good. And others in clear >contravention of democratic norms. *** The Indian SC has taken up upon itself ( go look up its website) to take up issues that go beyond interpreting the constitution or the laws of the land. It acknowledges it and justifies it because of desi-demokrasy's failings ( not exactly in those words however :-)), to provide relief to the unrepresented, to the downtrodden of society. That I characterize as 'good'. It is an activist, constructive stance. But it has negative consequences too. Such as: ** It is bogged down with cases that should be clearly addressed by the legislative and /or executive branches, thereby delaying other cases which should not be left dangling in the air. Like the suit that challenged the legitimacy of the Narmada dam, that went undecided for six years, causing untold harm to a lot of unrepresented people, while the govt. proceeded with its construction. When the SC finally rendered its verdict, with relief to the victims, it wass already too late to, undo a lot of damage that was done to the victims. ** It was an offhand, poorly deliberated opinion ( not a directive as was clarified later) from the then about to retire Chief Justice that purportedly ordered the govt.to undertake the riverlinking and complete in ten years or some such absurdity. No doubt the the administration used the purported directive to advance its own political agenda, by choosing to interpret it the way it did. That was unconscionable. What expertise did the SC or the CJ have to render such a verdict? Did it hold hearings from recognized experts? Did it hear the side of the story from those who would be adversely effected by such a huge undertaking? I realize that in the course of interpreting the laws or the constitution, a high court can and do end up 'legislating' at times. That is not what I alluded to. At 4:03 PM -0500 5/3/06, Ram Sarangapani wrote: C'da >I know the Indian SC does a whole lot more: Some for the good. And others in clear >contravention of democratic norms. Thats a blanket statement. Are you saying that the SC is 'legislating from the bench' specially when some rulings don't go in ones favor? Do you have some stark examples? And what about the ruling against the GOI and the GOA to produce missing ULFA cadres from the Bhutan operation. The wife of one of the missing cadres filed the suit and won and the Govts. lost that case. Was that a bad ruling? I think the SC is probably one of the best Indian institutions and has more or less kept away from politics and remained independent. BTW as a 'sidebar': This same Supreme Court, just last month ruled that Indian whiskey manufacturers cannot use the words like Scot, Scotch etc, nor can they say 'like Scotch' in their labels or ads. The suit was brought up before them by a group of English Scotch manufacturers and they won. --Ram On 5/3/06, Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: One would think it is the prerogative of the people and its representatives -- the law-making entities, to make laws to uphold the constitutional mandates. SC merely INTERPRETS the laws of the land. I know the Indian SC does a whole lot more: Some for the good. And others in clear contravention of democratic norms. That is because of the abject failures of the desi-demokrasy and its law-making bodies. But should the people let a group of appointed lawyers be the final arbiters of what is their right, instead of attempting to reform and improve its lawmaking bodies? At 5:16 PM +0100 5/3/06, umesh sharma wrote: Does Supreme Court have the right to interpret the Indian constitution - and atleast remind the elected officials about what is written therein. Umesh Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: While it is disturbing to see uncontrolled proliferation of alcohol peddling and consumption in India, where does the SC derive its mandate to ASK ( read order) even in desi-demokrasy? Is the SC the SUPREME elected body of the country? cm Time has come for total prohibition: SC [ Wednesday, May 03, 2006 06:20:31 pmIANS ] NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has asked the central and state governments to take steps to achieve the goal of total prohibition of liquor as enshrined in Article 47 of the constitution under the Directive Principles of State Policy. Expressing serious concern on the ill effects of liquor, a bench of Justice S.B. Sinha and Justice P.K . Balasubramanyan said: "Article 47 of the constitution clearly casts a duty on the state at least to reduce the consumption of liquor in the state,
Re: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi DIKTATOR ?
Dear Barua, >I have observed that it is a characteristics of the Desis, they like to be ruled by >somebody. They actually do not believe in the democratic principle of 'government >by the people'. Thats nice - and when did we NRI/NRA 'God's gifts to Desis' manage to extricate ourselves from such doom & gloom? Are you saying those "characteristics" somehow got filtered out as soon as we crossed the seas? Aren't we lucky? -:) --Ram On 5/3/06, Rajen Barua <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >But should the people let a group of appointed lawyers be the final arbiters of what is their right, instead of attempting to reform and improve its lawmaking bodies? I have observed that it is a characteristics of the Desis, they like to be ruled by somebody. They actually do not believe in the democratic principle of 'government by the people'. OK I don't have time for those thiongs called reform. I am making you the king, go ahead and rule us, but make sure you rule good. OK. Don't cheat us now. (BTW if you can get a job for my son, that will be very much appreciated) Hobo Diok. RB - Original Message - From: Chan Mahanta To: assam@assamnet.org Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 2:38 PM Subject: Re: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi DIKTATOR ? One would think it is the prerogative of the people and its representatives -- the law-making entities, to make laws to uphold the constitutional mandates. SC merely INTERPRETS the laws of the land. I know the Indian SC does a whole lot more: Some for the good. And others in clear contravention of democratic norms. That is because of the abject failures of the desi-demokrasy and its law-making bodies. But should the people let a group of appointed lawyers be the final arbiters of what is their right, instead of attempting to reform and improve its lawmaking bodies? At 5:16 PM +0100 5/3/06, umesh sharma wrote: Does Supreme Court have the right to interpret the Indian constitution - and atleast remind the elected officials about what is written therein. Umesh Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: While it is disturbing to see uncontrolled proliferation of alcoholpeddling and consumption in India, where does the SC derive itsmandate to ASK ( read order)even in desi-demokrasy? Is the SC the SUPREME elected body of the country? cmTime has come for total prohibition: SC[ Wednesday, May 03, 2006 06:20:31 pmIANS ]NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has asked the central and stategovernments to take steps to achieve the goal of total prohibition of liquor as enshrined in Article 47 of the constitution under theDirective Principles of State Policy.Expressing serious concern on the ill effects of liquor, a bench ofJustice S.B. Sinha and Justice P.K . Balasubramanyan said: "Article 47of the constitution clearly casts a duty on the state at least toreduce the consumption of liquor in the state, gradually leading toprohibition itself."The judges said: "It appears to be right to point out that the time has come for the states and the union government to seriously thinkof taking steps to achieve the goal set by Article 47 of theconstitution."Writing the judgment, Justice Balasubramanyan said: "It is a notorious fact, of which we can take judicial notice, that more andmore of the younger generation in this country is getting addicted toliquor.It has not only become a fashion to consume it but it has also become an obsession with very many. Surely, we do not need anindolent nation."Why the state in the face of Article 47 of the constitution shouldencourage, that too practically unrestrictedly, the trade in liquor is something that is difficult to appreciate," the bench asked."The only excuse for the state for not following the mandate ofArticle 47 of the constitution is that huge revenue is generated by this trade and such revenue is being used for meeting the financialneeds of the state.What is more relevant here is to notice that the monopoly in thetrade is with the state and it is only a privilege that a licencee has in the matter of manufacturing and vending liquor," the benchnoted.The bench passed this order while disposing of an appeal filed bythe Maharashtra government against an interim order passed by the Bombay High Court on the issue of payment of requisite fee bydistilleries under the Bombay Rectified Spirit (Transport in Bond)Rules, 1951.___assam mailing list assam@assamnet.org http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org Umesh Sharma5121 Lackawanna STCollege Park, MD 207401-202-215-4328 [Cell Phone]Ed.M. - International Education PolicyHarvard Graduate School of Education, Harvard University,Class of 2005 Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com ___assam mailing listassa
Re: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi DIKTATOR ?
C'da >I know the Indian SC does a whole lot more: Some for the good. And others in clear >contravention of democratic norms. Thats a blanket statement. Are you saying that the SC is 'legislating from the bench' specially when some rulings don't go in ones favor? Do you have some stark examples? And what about the ruling against the GOI and the GOA to produce missing ULFA cadres from the Bhutan operation. The wife of one of the missing cadres filed the suit and won and the Govts. lost that case. Was that a bad ruling? I think the SC is probably one of the best Indian institutions and has more or less kept away from politics and remained independent. BTW as a 'sidebar': This same Supreme Court, just last month ruled that Indian whiskey manufacturers cannot use the words like Scot, Scotch etc, nor can they say 'like Scotch' in their labels or ads. The suit was brought up before them by a group of English Scotch manufacturers and they won. --Ram On 5/3/06, Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: One would think it is the prerogative of the people and its representatives -- the law-making entities, to make laws to uphold the constitutional mandates. SC merely INTERPRETS the laws of the land. I know the Indian SC does a whole lot more: Some for the good. And others in clear contravention of democratic norms. That is because of the abject failures of the desi-demokrasy and its law-making bodies. But should the people let a group of appointed lawyers be the final arbiters of what is their right, instead of attempting to reform and improve its lawmaking bodies? At 5:16 PM +0100 5/3/06, umesh sharma wrote: Does Supreme Court have the right to interpret the Indian constitution - and atleast remind the elected officials about what is written therein. Umesh Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: While it is disturbing to see uncontrolled proliferation of alcoholpeddling and consumption in India, where does the SC derive itsmandate to ASK ( read order)even in desi-demokrasy? Is the SC the SUPREME elected body of the country? cmTime has come for total prohibition: SC[ Wednesday, May 03, 2006 06:20:31 pmIANS ]NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has asked the central and stategovernments to take steps to achieve the goal of total prohibition of liquor as enshrined in Article 47 of the constitution under theDirective Principles of State Policy.Expressing serious concern on the ill effects of liquor, a bench ofJustice S.B. Sinha and Justice P.K . Balasubramanyan said: "Article 47of the constitution clearly casts a duty on the state at least toreduce the consumption of liquor in the state, gradually leading toprohibition itself."The judges said: "It appears to be right to point out that the time has come for the states and the union government to seriously thinkof taking steps to achieve the goal set by Article 47 of theconstitution."Writing the judgment, Justice Balasubramanyan said: "It is a notorious fact, of which we can take judicial notice, that more andmore of the younger generation in this country is getting addicted toliquor.It has not only become a fashion to consume it but it has also become an obsession with very many. Surely, we do not need anindolent nation."Why the state in the face of Article 47 of the constitution shouldencourage, that too practically unrestrictedly, the trade in liquor is something that is difficult to appreciate," the bench asked."The only excuse for the state for not following the mandate ofArticle 47 of the constitution is that huge revenue is generated by this trade and such revenue is being used for meeting the financialneeds of the state.What is more relevant here is to notice that the monopoly in thetrade is with the state and it is only a privilege that a licencee has in the matter of manufacturing and vending liquor," the benchnoted.The bench passed this order while disposing of an appeal filed bythe Maharashtra government against an interim order passed by the Bombay High Court on the issue of payment of requisite fee bydistilleries under the Bombay Rectified Spirit (Transport in Bond)Rules, 1951.___assam mailing list assam@assamnet.org http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org Umesh Sharma5121 Lackawanna STCollege Park, MD 207401-202-215-4328 [Cell Phone]Ed.M. - International Education PolicyHarvard Graduate School of Education, Harvard University,Class of 2005 Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com ___assam mailing listassam@assamnet.org http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org ___ assam mailing list assam@assamnet.org http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
Re: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi DIKTATOR ?
If I am not mistaken, this article 47 came directly from the British Constitution. In fact, similar articles exist in most constitutions (regarding public health). Remember, this was 1951 or when this was done. Now, if the legislators don't like the article, they can pass an amendment. >This is irreligious Law What has religion got to do with it? >Why the 'desi's will have to think conservative? >Why we make Laws knowing fully well that we cannot adopt it? Why point only to Desis? Was the US conservative in 1919 - a prohibition amendment which lasted for nearly 15 years? When they repealed it, can we ask the question as to why they made laws which they cannot adopt? (they found that out only after 15 years) IMHO: There are many laws that are NOT good (in all constitutions). Before the Mitakshara law, property could only be inherited by sons and not daughters. The point I am making is that laws are usually made taking into consideration of the times and customs at the time they were enacted. Only the test of time reverses these things. A good example is the famous case of a gay couple from Texas who broke Texas' sodomy laws. The US Supreme Court last month struck it down and declared that the Texas law was unconstitutional (as piercing the veil of privacy - not sodomy). That Texas law (stupid as it was) existed as a Texas law ever since Texas was a state. So, unjust and stupid laws change as times change - when people see them as not relevant any more or just plain unjust. --Ram On 5/3/06, Rajen Barua <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Article 47--Duty of the State to raise the level of nutrition and the standard of living and to improve public health The State shall regard the raising of the level of nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the improvement of public health as among its primary duties and, in particular, the State shall endeavour to bring about prohibition of the consumption except for medicinal purposes of intoxicating drinks and of drugs which are injurious to health This is irreligious Law. Is Xaj Pani (Rice Beer) injurious to health? Is wine injurious to health? Why the 'desi's will have to think conservative? Why we make Laws knowing fully well that we cannot adopt it? Why the 'desis' have to prove that they are hypocites? What is in the 'desi' mind? RB - Original Message - From: Ram Sarangapani To: Rajen Barua Cc: assam@assamnet.org ; Chan Mahanta Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 1:12 PM Subject: Re: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi DIKTATOR ? This is democracy at work. Why are we blaming the SC? The people elect their representatives, who in turn enact laws. The Indian Supreme Court ONLY interprets the constitution. If people (read legislators) don't want it, they can always pass an amendment. BTW: In the US, prohibition was passed into law thru an amendment, and upheld by the US Supreme Court in (around) 1919. Another amendment to the constitution repealed it and passed scrutinity of the Court. So, lets not blame the SC for doing what they are supposed to be doing. Here is Article 47 of the Indian Constitution. Article 47--Duty of the State to raise the level of nutrition and the standard of living and to improve public health The State shall regard the raising of the level of nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the improvement of public health as among its primary duties and, in particular, the State shall endeavour to bring about prohibition of the consumption except for medicinal purposes of intoxicating drinks and of drugs which are injurious to health . --Ram On 5/3/06, Rajen Barua <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: >The Supreme Court has asked the central and state >governments to take steps to achieve the goal of total prohibition of >liquor as enshrined in Article 47 of the constitution under the >Directive Principles of State Policy. I think the power comes from above. What is Article 47? Who makes these articles? I think people should stand up for their right. Other wise someone will make an Article tomorrow to make India a vegetrarain country gradually or "at least reduce the consumption of liquor (read meat) in the state, gradually leading to prohibition itself." The problem is not 'desi democracy', the problem is the 'desi'. RB - Original Message - From: "Chan Mahanta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: <assam@assamnet.org > Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 11:06 AM Subject: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi DIKTATOR ? > While it is disturbing to see uncontrolled proliferation of alcohol > peddling and consumption in India, where does the SC derive its > mandate to ASK ( read order)> even in desi-demokrasy? Is the SC the SUPREME elected body of the country?> > cm> > > > > > > > Time has come for tota
Re: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi DIKTATOR ?
Title: Re: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi DIKTATOR ? I wonder why so many northeastern people ( there may be others elsewhere as well) would submit to puritanical Indians' endeavor to prohibit alcoholic beverage consumption when it is an integral part of their culture and religion. And why should they? Who is the SC, thru usurped power, to dictate that? Or who is even the Lok Sabha to legislate that? What kind of a 'constitution' is this to impose it on these people without their advice or consent? At 3:13 PM -0500 5/3/06, Rajen Barua wrote: Article 47--Duty of the State to raise the level of nutrition and the standard of living and to improve public health The State shall regard the raising of the level of nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the improvement of public health as among its primary duties and, in particular, the State shall endeavour to bring about prohibition of the consumption except for medicinal purposes of intoxicating drinks and of drugs which are injurious to health This is irreligious Law. Is Xaj Pani (Rice Beer) injurious to health? Is wine injurious to health? Why the 'desi's will have to think conservative? Why we make Laws knowing fully well that we cannot adopt it? Why the 'desis' have to prove that they are hypocites? What is in the 'desi' mind? RB - Original Message - From: Ram Sarangapani To: Rajen Barua Cc: assam@assamnet.org ; Chan Mahanta Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 1:12 PM Subject: Re: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi DIKTATOR ? This is democracy at work. Why are we blaming the SC? The people elect their representatives, who in turn enact laws. The Indian Supreme Court ONLY interprets the constitution. If people (read legislators) don't want it, they can always pass an amendment. BTW: In the US, prohibition was passed into law thru an amendment, and upheld by the US Supreme Court in (around) 1919. Another amendment to the constitution repealed it and passed scrutinity of the Court. So, lets not blame the SC for doing what they are supposed to be doing. Here is Article 47 of the Indian Constitution. Article 47--Duty of the State to raise the level of nutrition and the standard of living and to improve public health The State shall regard the raising of the level of nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the improvement of public health as among its primary duties and, in particular, the State shall endeavour to bring about prohibition of the consumption except for medicinal purposes of intoxicating drinks and of drugs which are injurious to health . --Ram On 5/3/06, Rajen Barua <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >The Supreme Court has asked the central and state >governments to take steps to achieve the goal of total prohibition of >liquor as enshrined in Article 47 of the constitution under the >Directive Principles of State Policy. I think the power comes from above. What is Article 47? Who makes these articles? I think people should stand up for their right. Other wise someone will make an Article tomorrow to make India a vegetrarain country gradually or "at least reduce the consumption of liquor (read meat) in the state, gradually leading to prohibition itself." The problem is not 'desi democracy', the problem is the 'desi'. RB - Original Message - From: "Chan Mahanta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: <assam@assamnet.org > Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 11:06 AM Subject: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi DIKTATOR ? > While it is disturbing to see uncontrolled proliferation of alcohol > peddling and consumption in India, where does the SC derive its > mandate to ASK ( read order) > even in desi-demokrasy? Is the SC the SUPREME elected body of the country? > > cm > > > > > > > > Time has come for total prohibition: SC > [ Wednesday, May 03, 2006 06:20:31 pmIANS ] > > > > NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has asked the central and state > governments to take steps to achieve the goal of total prohibition of > liquor as enshrined in Article 47 of the constitution under the > Directive Principles of State Policy. > > Expressing serious concern on the ill effects of liquor, a bench of > Justice S.B. Sinha and Justice P.K. Balasubramanyan said: "Article 47 > of the constitution clearly casts a duty on the state at least to > reduce the consumption of liquor in the state, gradually leading to > prohibition itself." > > The judges said: "It appears to be right to point out that the time > has come for the states and the union government to seriously think > of taking steps to achieve the goal set by Article 47 of the > constitution." > > Writing the judgment, Justice Balasubramanyan said: "It is a > notorious fact, of which we can take judicial n
Re: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi DIKTATOR ?
Rajen-da, Perhaps we should go the Mexico way and make it legal to use LSD, Weed and other drugs . What is religion after all - it is man made. These drugs are also man made using ingredients which are God made:) UmeshRajen Barua <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Article 47--Duty of the State to raise the level of nutrition and the standard of living and to improve public health The State shall regard the raising of the level of nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the improvement of public health as among its primary duties and, in particular, the State shall endeavour to bring about prohibition of the consumption except for medicinal purposes of intoxicating drinks and of drugs which are injurious to health This is irreligious Law. Is Xaj Pani (Rice Beer) injurious to health? Is wine injurious to health? Why the 'desi's will have to think conservative? Why we make Laws knowing fully well that we cannot adopt it? Why the 'desis' have to prove that they are hypocites? What is in the 'desi' mind? RB- Original Message - From: Ram Sarangapani To: Rajen Barua Cc: assam@assamnet.org ; Chan Mahanta Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 1:12 PM Subject: Re: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi DIKTATOR ?This is democracy at work. Why are we blaming the SC? The people elect their representatives, who in turn enact laws. The Indian Supreme Court ONLY interprets the constitution. If people (read legislators) don't want it, they can always pass an amendment. BTW: In the US, prohibition was passed into law thru an amendment, and upheld by the US Supreme Court in (around) 1919. Another amendment to the constitution repealed it and passed scrutinity of the Court. So, lets not blame the SC for doing what they are supposed to be doing. Here is Article 47 of the Indian Constitution.Article 47--Duty of the State to raise the level of nutrition and the standard of living and to improve public health The State shall regard the raising of the level of nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the improvement of public health as among its primary duties and, in particular, the State shall endeavour to bring about prohibition of the consumption except for medicinal purposes of intoxicating drinks and of drugs which are injurious to health . --Ram On 5/3/06, Rajen Barua <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >The Supreme Court has asked the central and state >governments to take steps to achieve the goal of total prohibition of >liquor as enshrined in Article 47 of the constitution under the >Directive Principles of State Policy. I think the power comes from above. What is Article 47? Who makes these articles? I think people should stand up for their right. Other wise someone will make an Article tomorrow to make India a vegetrarain country gradually or "at least reduce the consumption of liquor (read meat) in the state, gradually leading to prohibition itself." The problem is not 'desi democracy', the problem is the 'desi'.RB - Original Message - From: "Chan Mahanta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: <assam@assamnet.org > Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 11:06 AM Subject: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi DIKTATOR ? > While it is disturbing to see uncontrolled proliferation of alcohol > peddling and consumption in India, where does the SC derive its > mandate to ASK ( read order)> even in desi-demokrasy? Is the SC the SUPREME elected body of the country?> > cm> > > > > > > > Time has come for total prohibition: SC > [ Wednesday, May 03, 2006 06:20:31 pmIANS ]> > > > NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has asked the central and state > governments to take steps to achieve the goal of total prohibition of > liquor as enshrined in Article 47 of the constitution under the > Directive Principles of State Policy.> > Expressing serious concern on the ill effects of liquor, a bench of > Justice S.B. Sinha and Justice P.K. Balasubramanyan said: "Article 47 > of the constitution clearly casts a duty on the state at least to > reduce the consumption of liquor in the state, gradually leading to > prohibition itself."> > The judges said: "It appears to be right to point out that the time > has come for the states and the union government to seriously think > of taking steps to achieve the goal set by Article 47 of the > constitution."> > Writing the judgment, Justice Balasubramanyan said: "It is a > notorious fact, of which we can take judicial notice, that more and > more of the younger generation in this country is getting addicted to > liquor.> > It has not only become a fashion to consume it but it has also > become an obsession with very many. Surely, we
Re: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi DIKTATOR ?
Article 47--Duty of the
State to raise the level of nutrition and the standard of living and to improve
public health
The State shall regard the raising of the level of
nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the improvement of public
health as among its primary duties and, in particular, the State shall endeavour to bring about prohibition of
the consumption except for medicinal purposes of intoxicating drinks and of
drugs which are injurious to health
This is irreligious
Law.
Is Xaj Pani (Rice Beer)
injurious to health?
Is wine injurious to
health?
Why the 'desi's will have to
think conservative?
Why we make Laws knowing
fully well that we cannot adopt it?
Why the 'desis' have to prove
that they are hypocites?
What is in the 'desi'
mind?
RB
- Original Message -
From:
Ram Sarangapani
To: Rajen Barua
Cc: assam@assamnet.org ; Chan Mahanta
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 1:12
PM
Subject: Re: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New
Desi DIKTATOR ?
This is democracy at work. Why are we blaming the SC?
The people elect their representatives, who in turn enact laws. The
Indian Supreme Court ONLY interprets the constitution. If people (read
legislators) don't want it, they can always pass an amendment.
BTW: In the US, prohibition was passed into law thru an amendment, and
upheld by the US Supreme Court in (around) 1919. Another amendment to the
constitution repealed it and passed scrutinity of the Court.
So, lets not blame the SC for doing what they are supposed to be
doing.
Here is Article 47 of the Indian Constitution.
Article 47--Duty of the
State to raise the level of nutrition and the standard of living and to
improve public health
The State shall regard the raising of the level of
nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the improvement of
public health as among its primary duties and, in particular, the State shall
endeavour to bring about prohibition of the consumption except for medicinal
purposes of intoxicating drinks and of drugs which are injurious to health
.
--Ram
On 5/3/06, Rajen
Barua <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>The Supreme Court has asked the central and
state >governments to take steps to achieve the goal of total
prohibition of >liquor as enshrined in Article 47 of
the constitution under the >Directive Principles of State
Policy.
I think the power comes from
above.
What is Article
47?
Who makes these
articles?
I think people should stand up
for their right.
Other wise someone will make an
Article tomorrow to make India a vegetrarain country gradually or "at
least reduce the consumption of liquor (read meat) in the state, gradually
leading to prohibition itself." The problem is not 'desi democracy',
the problem is the 'desi'.
RB
- Original Message -
From: "Chan Mahanta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >
To: <assam@assamnet.org
>
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 11:06
AM
Subject: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi
DIKTATOR ?
> While it is disturbing to see uncontrolled proliferation of
alcohol > peddling and consumption in India, where does the SC derive
its > mandate to ASK ( read order)> even in desi-demokrasy? Is
the SC the SUPREME elected body of the country?> > cm>
> > > > > > > Time has come
for total prohibition: SC > [ Wednesday, May 03, 2006 06:20:31 pmIANS
]> > > > NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has
asked the central and state > governments to take steps to achieve
the goal of total prohibition of > liquor as enshrined in Article 47
of the constitution under the > Directive Principles of State
Policy.> > Expressing serious concern on the ill
effects of liquor, a bench of > Justice S.B. Sinha and Justice P.K.
Balasubramanyan said: "Article 47 > of the constitution clearly casts
a duty on the state at least to > reduce the consumption of liquor in
the state, gradually leading to > prohibition itself.">
> The judges said: "It appears to be right to point out that
the time > has come for the states and the union government to
seriously think > of taking steps to achieve the goal set by Article
47 of the > constitution."> > Writing the
judgment, Justice Balasubramanyan said: "It is a > notorious fact, of
which we can take judicial notice, that more and > more of the
younger generation in this country is getting addicted to >
liquor.> > It has not only become a fashion to consume
it but it has also > become an obs
Re: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi DIKTATOR ?
Title: Re: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi DIKTATOR ? >But should the people let a group of appointed lawyers be the final arbiters of what is their right, instead of attempting to reform and improve its lawmaking bodies? I have observed that it is a characteristics of the Desis, they like to be ruled by somebody. They actually do not believe in the democratic principle of 'government by the people'. OK I don't have time for those thiongs called reform. I am making you the king, go ahead and rule us, but make sure you rule good. OK. Don't cheat us now. (BTW if you can get a job for my son, that will be very much appreciated) Hobo Diok. RB - Original Message - From: Chan Mahanta To: assam@assamnet.org Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 2:38 PM Subject: Re: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi DIKTATOR ? One would think it is the prerogative of the people and its representatives -- the law-making entities, to make laws to uphold the constitutional mandates. SC merely INTERPRETS the laws of the land. I know the Indian SC does a whole lot more: Some for the good. And others in clear contravention of democratic norms. That is because of the abject failures of the desi-demokrasy and its law-making bodies. But should the people let a group of appointed lawyers be the final arbiters of what is their right, instead of attempting to reform and improve its lawmaking bodies? At 5:16 PM +0100 5/3/06, umesh sharma wrote: Does Supreme Court have the right to interpret the Indian constitution - and atleast remind the elected officials about what is written therein. Umesh Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: While it is disturbing to see uncontrolled proliferation of alcoholpeddling and consumption in India, where does the SC derive itsmandate to ASK ( read order)even in desi-demokrasy? Is the SC the SUPREME elected body of the country?cmTime has come for total prohibition: SC[ Wednesday, May 03, 2006 06:20:31 pmIANS ]NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has asked the central and stategovernments to take steps to achieve the goal of total prohibition ofliquor as enshrined in Article 47 of the constitution under theDirective Principles of State Policy.Expressing serious concern on the ill effects of liquor, a bench ofJustice S.B. Sinha and Justice P.K. Balasubramanyan said: "Article 47of the constitution clearly casts a duty on the state at least toreduce the consumption of liquor in the state, gradually leading toprohibition itself."The judges said: "It appears to be right to point out that the timehas come for the states and the union government to seriously thinkof taking steps to achieve the goal set by Article 47 of theconstitution."Writing the judgment, Justice Balasubramanyan said: "It is anotorious fact, of which we can take judicial notice, that more andmore of the younger generation in this country is getting addicted toliquor.It has not only become a fashion to consume it but it has alsobecome an obsession with very many. Surely, we do not need anindolent nation."Why the state in the face of Article 47 of the constitution shouldencourage, that too practically unrestrictedly, the trade in liquoris something that is difficult to appreciate," the bench asked."The only excuse for the state for not following the mandate ofArticle 47 of the constitution is that huge revenue is generated bythis trade and such revenue is being used for meeting the financialneeds of the state.What is more relevant here is to notice that the monopoly in thetrade is with the state and it is only a privilege that a licenceehas in the matter of manufacturing and vending liquor," the benchnoted.The bench passed this order while disposing of an appeal filed bythe Maharashtra government against an interim order passed by theBombay High Court on the issue of payment of requisite fee bydistilleries under the Bombay Rectified Spirit (Transport in Bond)Rules, 1951.___assam mailing listassam@assamnet.orghttp://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org Umesh Sharma5121 Lackawanna STCollege Park, MD 207401-202-215-4328 [Cell Phone]Ed.M. - International Education PolicyHarvard Graduate School of Education,Harvard University,Class of 2005 Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com ___assam mailing listassam@assamnet.orghttp://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org ___
Re: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi DIKTATOR ?
Title: Re: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi DIKTATOR ? One would think it is the prerogative of the people and its representatives -- the law-making entities, to make laws to uphold the constitutional mandates. SC merely INTERPRETS the laws of the land. I know the Indian SC does a whole lot more: Some for the good. And others in clear contravention of democratic norms. That is because of the abject failures of the desi-demokrasy and its law-making bodies. But should the people let a group of appointed lawyers be the final arbiters of what is their right, instead of attempting to reform and improve its lawmaking bodies? At 5:16 PM +0100 5/3/06, umesh sharma wrote: Does Supreme Court have the right to interpret the Indian constitution - and atleast remind the elected officials about what is written therein. Umesh Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: While it is disturbing to see uncontrolled proliferation of alcohol peddling and consumption in India, where does the SC derive its mandate to ASK ( read order) even in desi-demokrasy? Is the SC the SUPREME elected body of the country? cm Time has come for total prohibition: SC [ Wednesday, May 03, 2006 06:20:31 pmIANS ] NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has asked the central and state governments to take steps to achieve the goal of total prohibition of liquor as enshrined in Article 47 of the constitution under the Directive Principles of State Policy. Expressing serious concern on the ill effects of liquor, a bench of Justice S.B. Sinha and Justice P.K. Balasubramanyan said: "Article 47 of the constitution clearly casts a duty on the state at least to reduce the consumption of liquor in the state, gradually leading to prohibition itself." The judges said: "It appears to be right to point out that the time has come for the states and the union government to seriously think of taking steps to achieve the goal set by Article 47 of the constitution." Writing the judgment, Justice Balasubramanyan said: "It is a notorious fact, of which we can take judicial notice, that more and more of the younger generation in this country is getting addicted to liquor. It has not only become a fashion to consume it but it has also become an obsession with very many. Surely, we do not need an indolent nation. "Why the state in the face of Article 47 of the constitution should encourage, that too practically unrestrictedly, the trade in liquor is something that is difficult to appreciate," the bench asked. "The only excuse for the state for not following the mandate of Article 47 of the constitution is that huge revenue is generated by this trade and such revenue is being used for meeting the financial needs of the state. What is more relevant here is to notice that the monopoly in the trade is with the state and it is only a privilege that a licencee has in the matter of manufacturing and vending liquor," the bench noted. The bench passed this order while disposing of an appeal filed by the Maharashtra government against an interim order passed by the Bombay High Court on the issue of payment of requisite fee by distilleries under the Bombay Rectified Spirit (Transport in Bond) Rules, 1951. ___ assam mailing list assam@assamnet.org http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org Umesh Sharma 5121 Lackawanna ST College Park, MD 20740 1-202-215-4328 [Cell Phone] Ed.M. - International Education Policy Harvard Graduate School of Education, Harvard University, Class of 2005 Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com ___ assam mailing list assam@assamnet.org http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
Re: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi DIKTATOR ?
This is democracy at work. Why are we blaming the SC? The people elect their representatives, who in turn enact laws. The Indian Supreme Court ONLY interprets the constitution. If people (read legislators) don't want it, they can always pass an amendment. BTW: In the US, prohibition was passed into law thru an amendment, and upheld by the US Supreme Court in (around) 1919. Another amendment to the constitution repealed it and passed scrutinity of the Court. So, lets not blame the SC for doing what they are supposed to be doing. Here is Article 47 of the Indian Constitution. Article 47--Duty of the State to raise the level of nutrition and the standard of living and to improve public health The State shall regard the raising of the level of nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the improvement of public health as among its primary duties and, in particular, the State shall endeavour to bring about prohibition of the consumption except for medicinal purposes of intoxicating drinks and of drugs which are injurious to health . --Ram On 5/3/06, Rajen Barua <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >The Supreme Court has asked the central and state >governments to take steps to achieve the goal of total prohibition of >liquor as enshrined in Article 47 of the constitution under the >Directive Principles of State Policy. I think the power comes from above. What is Article 47? Who makes these articles? I think people should stand up for their right. Other wise someone will make an Article tomorrow to make India a vegetrarain country gradually or "at least reduce the consumption of liquor (read meat) in the state, gradually leading to prohibition itself." The problem is not 'desi democracy', the problem is the 'desi'. RB - Original Message - From: "Chan Mahanta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: <assam@assamnet.org > Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 11:06 AM Subject: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi DIKTATOR ? > While it is disturbing to see uncontrolled proliferation of alcohol > peddling and consumption in India, where does the SC derive its > mandate to ASK ( read order)> even in desi-demokrasy? Is the SC the SUPREME elected body of the country?> > cm> > > > > > > > Time has come for total prohibition: SC > [ Wednesday, May 03, 2006 06:20:31 pmIANS ]> > > > NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has asked the central and state > governments to take steps to achieve the goal of total prohibition of > liquor as enshrined in Article 47 of the constitution under the > Directive Principles of State Policy.> > Expressing serious concern on the ill effects of liquor, a bench of > Justice S.B. Sinha and Justice P.K. Balasubramanyan said: "Article 47 > of the constitution clearly casts a duty on the state at least to > reduce the consumption of liquor in the state, gradually leading to > prohibition itself."> > The judges said: "It appears to be right to point out that the time > has come for the states and the union government to seriously think > of taking steps to achieve the goal set by Article 47 of the > constitution."> > Writing the judgment, Justice Balasubramanyan said: "It is a > notorious fact, of which we can take judicial notice, that more and > more of the younger generation in this country is getting addicted to > liquor.> > It has not only become a fashion to consume it but it has also > become an obsession with very many. Surely, we do not need an > indolent nation.> > "Why the state in the face of Article 47 of the constitution should > encourage, that too practically unrestrictedly, the trade in liquor > is something that is difficult to appreciate," the bench asked.> > "The only excuse for the state for not following the mandate of > Article 47 of the constitution is that huge revenue is generated by > this trade and such revenue is being used for meeting the financial > needs of the state.> > What is more relevant here is to notice that the monopoly in the > trade is with the state and it is only a privilege that a licencee > has in the matter of manufacturing and vending liquor," the bench > noted.> > The bench passed this order while disposing of an appeal filed by > the Maharashtra government against an interim order passed by the > Bombay High Court on the issue of payment of requisite fee by > distilleries under the Bombay Rectified Spirit (Transport in Bond) > Rules, 1951.> > ___> assam mailing list> assam@assamnet.org> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org> ___assam mailing list assam@assamnet.org http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org ___ assam mailing list assam@assamnet.org http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
Re: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi DIKTATOR ?
>The Supreme Court has asked the central and state >governments to take steps to achieve the goal of total prohibition of >liquor as enshrined in Article 47 of the constitution under the >Directive Principles of State Policy. I think the power comes from above. What is Article 47? Who makes these articles? I think people should stand up for their right. Other wise someone will make an Article tomorrow to make India a vegetrarain country gradually or "at least reduce the consumption of liquor (read meat) in the state, gradually leading to prohibition itself."The problem is not 'desi democracy', the problem is the 'desi'. RB - Original Message - From: "Chan Mahanta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <assam@assamnet.org> Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 11:06 AM Subject: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi DIKTATOR ? > While it is disturbing to see uncontrolled proliferation of alcohol > peddling and consumption in India, where does the SC derive its > mandate to ASK ( read order)> even in desi-demokrasy? Is the SC the SUPREME elected body of the country?> > cm> > > > > > > > Time has come for total prohibition: SC> [ Wednesday, May 03, 2006 06:20:31 pmIANS ]> > > > NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has asked the central and state > governments to take steps to achieve the goal of total prohibition of > liquor as enshrined in Article 47 of the constitution under the > Directive Principles of State Policy.> > Expressing serious concern on the ill effects of liquor, a bench of > Justice S.B. Sinha and Justice P.K. Balasubramanyan said: "Article 47 > of the constitution clearly casts a duty on the state at least to > reduce the consumption of liquor in the state, gradually leading to > prohibition itself."> > The judges said: "It appears to be right to point out that the time > has come for the states and the union government to seriously think > of taking steps to achieve the goal set by Article 47 of the > constitution."> > Writing the judgment, Justice Balasubramanyan said: "It is a > notorious fact, of which we can take judicial notice, that more and > more of the younger generation in this country is getting addicted to > liquor.> > It has not only become a fashion to consume it but it has also > become an obsession with very many. Surely, we do not need an > indolent nation.> > "Why the state in the face of Article 47 of the constitution should > encourage, that too practically unrestrictedly, the trade in liquor > is something that is difficult to appreciate," the bench asked.> > "The only excuse for the state for not following the mandate of > Article 47 of the constitution is that huge revenue is generated by > this trade and such revenue is being used for meeting the financial > needs of the state.> > What is more relevant here is to notice that the monopoly in the > trade is with the state and it is only a privilege that a licencee > has in the matter of manufacturing and vending liquor," the bench > noted.> > The bench passed this order while disposing of an appeal filed by > the Maharashtra government against an interim order passed by the > Bombay High Court on the issue of payment of requisite fee by > distilleries under the Bombay Rectified Spirit (Transport in Bond) > Rules, 1951.> > ___> assam mailing list> assam@assamnet.org> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org> ___ assam mailing list assam@assamnet.org http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
Re: [Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi DIKTATOR ?
Does Supreme Court have the right to interpret the Indian constitution - and atleast remind the elected officials about what is written therein. Umesh Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: While it is disturbing to see uncontrolled proliferation of alcohol peddling and consumption in India, where does the SC derive its mandate to ASK ( read order)even in desi-demokrasy? Is the SC the SUPREME elected body of the country?cmTime has come for total prohibition: SC[ Wednesday, May 03, 2006 06:20:31 pmIANS ]NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has asked the central and state governments to take steps to achieve the goal of total prohibition of liquor as enshrined in Article 47 of the constitution under the Directive Principles of State Policy.Expressing serious concern on the ill effects of liquor, a bench of Justice S.B. Sinha and Justice P.K. Balasubramanyan said: "Article 47 of the constitution clearly casts a duty on the state at least to reduce the consumption of liquor in the state, gradually leading to prohibition itself."The judges said: "It appears to be right to point out that the time has come for the states and the union government to seriously think of taking steps to achieve the goal set by Article 47 of the constitution."Writing the judgment, Justice Balasubramanyan said: "It is a notorious fact, of which we can take judicial notice, that more and more of the younger generation in this country is getting addicted to liquor.It has not only become a fashion to consume it but it has also become an obsession with very many. Surely, we do not need an indolent nation."Why the state in the face of Article 47 of the constitution should encourage, that too practically unrestrictedly, the trade in liquor is something that is difficult to appreciate," the bench asked."The only excuse for the state for not following the mandate of Article 47 of the constitution is that huge revenue is generated by this trade and such revenue is being used for meeting the financial needs of the state.What is more relevant here is to notice that the monopoly in the trade is with the state and it is only a privilege that a licencee has in the matter of manufacturing and vending liquor," the bench noted.The bench passed this order while disposing of an appeal filed by the Maharashtra government against an interim order passed by the Bombay High Court on the issue of payment of requisite fee by distilleries under the Bombay Rectified Spirit (Transport in Bond) Rules, 1951.___assam mailing listassam@assamnet.orghttp://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.orgUmesh Sharma5121 Lackawanna STCollege Park, MD 20740 1-202-215-4328 [Cell Phone]Ed.M. - International Education PolicyHarvard Graduate School of Education,Harvard University,Class of 2005Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com ___ assam mailing list assam@assamnet.org http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
[Assam] From ToI/ SC the New Desi DIKTATOR ?
While it is disturbing to see uncontrolled proliferation of alcohol peddling and consumption in India, where does the SC derive its mandate to ASK ( read order) even in desi-demokrasy? Is the SC the SUPREME elected body of the country? cm Time has come for total prohibition: SC [ Wednesday, May 03, 2006 06:20:31 pmIANS ] NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has asked the central and state governments to take steps to achieve the goal of total prohibition of liquor as enshrined in Article 47 of the constitution under the Directive Principles of State Policy. Expressing serious concern on the ill effects of liquor, a bench of Justice S.B. Sinha and Justice P.K. Balasubramanyan said: "Article 47 of the constitution clearly casts a duty on the state at least to reduce the consumption of liquor in the state, gradually leading to prohibition itself." The judges said: "It appears to be right to point out that the time has come for the states and the union government to seriously think of taking steps to achieve the goal set by Article 47 of the constitution." Writing the judgment, Justice Balasubramanyan said: "It is a notorious fact, of which we can take judicial notice, that more and more of the younger generation in this country is getting addicted to liquor. It has not only become a fashion to consume it but it has also become an obsession with very many. Surely, we do not need an indolent nation. "Why the state in the face of Article 47 of the constitution should encourage, that too practically unrestrictedly, the trade in liquor is something that is difficult to appreciate," the bench asked. "The only excuse for the state for not following the mandate of Article 47 of the constitution is that huge revenue is generated by this trade and such revenue is being used for meeting the financial needs of the state. What is more relevant here is to notice that the monopoly in the trade is with the state and it is only a privilege that a licencee has in the matter of manufacturing and vending liquor," the bench noted. The bench passed this order while disposing of an appeal filed by the Maharashtra government against an interim order passed by the Bombay High Court on the issue of payment of requisite fee by distilleries under the Bombay Rectified Spirit (Transport in Bond) Rules, 1951. ___ assam mailing list assam@assamnet.org http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
