Chandigarh Liquor Vends Allotment Case Stalls as Judges Step Back: Uncertainty Grips Punjab’s Capital
In a shocking development which has turned Chandigarh’s business environment upside down, two judges from the Punjab and Haryana High Court stepped away from hearing a controversial plea relating to the liquor vends allotment process, bringing further legal pandemonium and straining expectations of accountability within the ₹1200 crores liquor business. It aggravates the verdict’s impact on hundreds of license holders and increases the risk to Chandigarh’s fiscal framework.
Why Did the Judges Recuse?
While no official reason was cited, legal insiders suggest possible conflict of interests or delicate procedural issues. This, extremely important to Chandigarh’s excise revenue, contains claims of:
Unfair Allotment: Evidence of bias in distribution of licenses.
Policy Violations: Claims that the auction of liquor vends for the year 2025-26 did not adhere to standard processes.
Financial Fallout: In excess of 250 businesses face potential losses if the licenses are cancelled.
Human Impact: “Our Livelihoods Are Stuck in Court”
The wait is particularly painful for small operators in the liquor industry hospitality sector:
Rajesh Kumar, a liquor shop owner: “I will go bankrupt if the court cancels it because I took a loan of ₹50 lakh against this license.”
Hoteliers Hyperventilate Over Losses: Speculation of losing out on business comes for Bars located in Elante Mall and in Sector 26 prior to the peak wedding season.
Public Safety Risk: Activists flag the potential for illegal dipping into liquor stock wells if cap on legal vend allotments stall.
Legal Quagmire: What’s the Controversy?
Bidder exclusions have been Colorado Springs filed by a set of petitioned group contesting:
Arbitrary Zoning: Key commercial areas were earmarked for “preferred” bidders.
Bid Rigging: Alleged collusion between cartelized processes of officials and liquor cartels.
Revenue Loss: Chandigarh’s excise department is at risk of not meeting ₹1,200 core threshold target.
Political Reactions: Probe Demand By The Opposition
AAP’s Chandigarh Wing: “Monopoly””-etched administrational cought bludgeoning fairness trademark on decks ruling ‘at large’ suspected lost.
BJP’s Takedown: Blamed AAPp for “politicizing gaps in time through coordinates.”
What’s Missing?
Lack of a calendared deadline pushes a remaining frame in question; swtiching judges tasked with the case.
On the other hand, businesses are contemplating harsh measures of action with explicit statements made by an leading vendor union: “If required, we will go on the offensive and stage outside the High Court.”
With no set date from other judges, the case will potentially encounter tightened pressure from Chandigarh’s excise department to pause on renewing licenses then the awarding the different judges is issued set.
