Anuj Garg& OrsVs

Hotel Association of India & Ors(2007) 13 SCALE 762

(A case analysis submitted as a project)

TABLE OF CASES

1. Table of Contents..............................................................................................................................1

2. Table of Cases...................................................................................................................................1

3. CHAPTER – 1 Introduction.............................................................................................................3

4. CHAPTER – 2 Facts of the case.......................................................................................................5

5. CHAPTER – 3 Basic principles involved.........................................................................................6

6. CHAPTER – 4 Judgment..................................................................................................................8

7. CHAPTER – 5 Comparative analysis...............................................................................................9

8. CHAPTER – 6 Conclusion.............................................................................................................11

9. Bibliography...................................................................................................................................12

TABLE OF CASES

1

Air India v. Nergesh Meerza AIR 1981……………………………………………………………………9

Madhu Kishwar and Ors. v. State of Bihar and Ors.AIR 1996…………………………………………………………………......9

Vishaka and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. AIR 1997……………………………………………………………...9

Abdulaziz, Cabales And Balkandali v. United Kingdom, [1985]……………………………………………………………..….10

United States v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515 [1996]……………………………..………………………….……....10

Randhir Singh v. Union of India and Ors. AIR 1982………………………………………………………….....10

Githa Hariharan v. Reserve Bank of India AIR 1999…………………………………………………………....10

CHAPTER - 1

Introduction

2

The question involved in this appeal was - Constitutional validity of Section 30 of the Punjab

Excise Act, 1914 prohibiting employment of "any man under the age of 25 years" or "any

woman" in any part of such premises in which liquor or intoxicating drug was consumed by the

public. The appeal arose out of a judgment and order dated 12.01.2006 passed by the High Court

of Delhi.

The case1was decided on 06.12.2007, the petitioners were Anuj Garg & Ors and the respondents

were Hotel Association of India & Ors. S. B. Sinha J. and Harjit Singh Bedi J. were honorable

judges

Mr. Rajiv Dutta, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants, in support of this

appeal, submitted that as nobody has any fundamental right to deal in liquor, being 'res extra

commercium', the State had the right to make a law and/or continue the old law imposing

reasonable restrictions on the nature of employment.

Mr. Arun Jaitley, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, on the other

hand, supported the impugned judgment. The judgment was challenged on the point of its

validity on the touchstone of Articles 14, 15 and 19 of the Constitution of India.

In this case we are faced with the question of individual rights of women, the standard of Judicial

Scrutiny to be applied to such cases involving the constitutionality of a law of protective

discrimination. It is to be borne in mind that legislations with so called "protective

discrimination" aims, such as this one, act as double edged sword. Strict scrutiny test should be

employed while assessing the effect of this kind of legislations. The effect of this variety of

legislations should always be kept in mind, not only the proposed aim of it. The Court's task is to

determine whether the measures resorted to by the State in form of legislative mandate, with the

aim of protecting the interests of women are proportionate to the other bulk of well-settled

gender norms or gender principles such as autonomy, equality of opportunity, right to privacy

etc. at all. The bottom-line here should be a well functioning modern democratic society which

ensures freedom to pursue varied opportunities and options without discriminating on the basis

of sex, race, caste or any other basis. There should be a reasonable relationship of proportionality

between the means used and the aim pursued. Instead of prohibiting women employment in the

1CASE NO.:Appeal (civil) 5657 of 2007

3

bars altogether the state should focus on factoring in ways through which unequal consequences

of sex differences can be eliminated. It is the duty of the state to ensure safety and security of

women which develops confidence in them to discharge their duty freely in accordance to the

requirements of the profession they choose to follow. Any other policy (such as the one

embodied under section 30of the Punjab Excise Act 1914) would be oppressive on the women

and against the privacy rights given the social conditions that exist today.

For the sake of convenience the project has been divided into six chapters, each of them dealing

with different issues. Chapter 2 outlines the facts of the case in brief and the arguments given by

the council from both sides, chapter 3 deals with the basic principles involved in the case that

were taken into consideration, chapter 4 is the judgment part, chapter 5 contains the analysis of

the vase keeping in view the comparative aspect i.e. the case has been compared with the various

Indian and foreign judgments, and the last chapter, chapter 6 is the conclusion part.

Keeping in view the analytical approach adopted in this project, the various sources and

references were AIRs, internet (manupatra.com, indiankanoon.com, westlaw.com) and the books

and journals which have been mentioned in the bibliography of this project.

CHAPTER - 2

Facts of the case

4

a) Issue in question - Constitutional validity of Section 30 of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914

prohibiting employment of "any man under the age of 25 years" or "any woman" in any part of

such premises in which liquor or intoxicating drug was consumed by the public was the question

involved in this appeal which arose out of a judgment and order dated 12.01.2006 passed by the

High Court of Delhi.

b) First Respondent was the Hotel Association of India. Its members carried on business in

hotels. Liquor was served in the hotels not only in the bar but also in the restaurant. Liquor was

also served in rooms as part of room service. First Respondent with four others filed a writ

petition before the Delhi High Court questioning the validity of the said provision. In

consequence to that Section 30 of the Act was declared to be ultra vires Articles 19(1)(g), 14 and

15 of the Constitution of India as it prohibited employment of any woman in any part of such

premises, in which liquor or intoxicating drugs are consumed by the public.

c) National Capital Territory of Delhi had accepted the said judgment. But as a respondent, it

sought to support the impugned statutory provision, although no Special Leave Petition was filed

by it. Appellants herein, who were a few citizens of Delhi, appeared as appellant.

d) A special leave petition was filed by the First Respondent questioning that part of the order

whereby restrictions had been put on employment of any man below the age of 25 years.

e) Mr. Rajiv Dutta, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants, in support of

this appeal, submitted that as nobody has any fundamental right to deal in liquor, being 'res extra

commercial, the State had the right to make a law and/or continue the old law imposing

reasonable restrictions on the nature of employment therein.

f) Mr. Arun Jaitley, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, on the other

hand, supported the impugned judgment.

CHAPTER-3

Basic Principles Involved

Rights of women: -

5

The debate was relating to the individual rights of women. Here the individual rights were

challenged by a problem of practical import of enforcement and security. The question was

regarding the rights of women in a specific field of employment owing to the security and the

nature of the employment. The changing legal scenario and having regard to the Declaration on

the Right to Development adopted by the World Conference on Human Rights as also Article 18

of the United Nations Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966, were referred. Gender

equality today is recognized by the European Court as one of the key principles underlying the

Convention and a goal to be achieved by member States of the Council of Europe the various

cases were referred to this effect.

The act was pre constitutional: -

When the original Act was enacted, the concept of equality between two sexes was unknown.

The makers of the Constitution intended to apply equality amongst men and women in all

spheres of life. In framing Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution, the constitutional goal in that

behalf was sought to be achieved. Although the same would not mean that under no

circumstance, classification, inter alia, on the ground of sex would be wholly impermissible but

it is trite that when the validity of legislation is tested on the anvil of equality clauses contained

in Articles 14 and 15, the burden therefore would be on the State. While considering validity of a

legislation of this nature, the court was to take notice of the other provisions of the Constitution.

Focus on changing realities: -

We may now look into the ground reality. In India, hospitality industry has grown by leaps and

bounds. As noticed hereinbefore, liquor, in the hospitality industry, is being served not only in

the bar but also in the restaurant. Service of liquor is permissible also in the rooms of a hotel. As

liquor is permitted to be served even in rooms, the restriction would also operate in any of the

services including housekeeping where a woman has to enter into a room; the logical result of

such a wide restriction would be that even if service of liquor is made permissible in the flight,

the employment of women as air-hostesses may be held to be prohibited.

Res extra commercium issue: -

6

In our constitution the validity of equality is tested on the ground of article 14, 15 and 16. The

burden of upholding the validity of the section was on the state. To deprive a large section of

successful young men and women from obtaining any job for which they have duly been trained,

would be wholly unjust. The State cannot invoke the doctrine of 'res extra commercium' in the

matter of appointment of eligible persons. It was further observed, “a person may not have any

fundamental right to trade or do business in liquor, but the person's right to grant employment or

seek employment, when a business is carried on in terms of the provisions of the license, is not

regulated."

CHAPTER - 4

Judgment

7

The Government of NCT Delhi, although did not challenge the impugned judgment of the Delhi

High Court, sought to enter into the fray through a side door. It, on the one hand, challenged the

locus of the appellant which objection, if upheld, would make the appeal liable to be dismissed at

the threshold, on the other, sought to justify the validity of Section 30 of the Act. It cited

examples of Jessica Lal and BMW to highlight dangerous consequences of allowing sale and

consumption of liquor by young men below the age of 25 years and vulnerability of women

while working in bars. When the restrictions were in force, they could not prevent such

occurrences. If the restriction continued, some such incidents might again happen. But only on a

pre-supposition that there was a possibility of some incident happening, the court could not

declare a law intra virus which was ex facie ultra virus.

Young men who take a degree or diploma in Hotel Management enter into service at the age of

22 years or 23 years. It, thus, cannot prohibit employment of men below 25 years. It allowed the

judgment of High Court to attain finality, the appeal was therefore dismissed.

CHAPTER - 5

Comparative analysis

8

International treaties on the rights of women were noticed by this Court in a large number of

judgments, some precedents that were mentioned are as follows.

a) In Air India v. Nergesh Meerza AIR 19812, this Court was faced with the constitutional

validity of Regulation 46(i)(c) of Air India Employees' Service Regulations, it was provided that

the services of the Air Hostesses would stand terminated on first pregnancy. The Court after

considering various US Supreme Court judgments regarding pregnant women held that the

observations made therein would apply to the domestic cases.

b) In Madhu Kishwar and Ors. v. State of Bihar and Ors. AIR19963 , challenge was made to

certain provisions of Chotanagpur Tenancy Act, 1908 providing succession to property in the

male line in favour of the male on the premise that the provisions are discriminatory and unfair

against women and, therefore, ultra vires the equality clause in the Constitution. The Court while

upholding the fundamental right of the Tribal women to the right to livelihood held that the State

was under an obligation to enforce the provisions of the Vienna Convention on the elimination of

all forms of discrimination against women (CEDAW) which provided that discrimination against

women violated the principles of equality of rights and respects for human dignity.

c) In Vishaka and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan and Ors. AIR19974, the writ petition was filed for

the enforcement of the fundamental rights of working women under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the

Constitution of India with the aim of finding suitable methods for realization of the true concept

of "gender equality"; and preventing sexual harassment of working women in all work places

through judicial process to fill the vacuum in existing legislation. This Court while framing the

guidelines and norms to be observed by the employers in work places to ensure the prevention of

sexual harassment of women, inter alia, relied on the provisions in the Convention on the

Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women5 as also the general

recommendations of CEDAW for construing the nature and ambit of constitutional guarantee of

gender equality in our Constitution.

d) In the case of Abdulaziz, Cabales And Balkandali v. United Kingdom, [1985] ECHR 7 the

court (European Court of Human Rights) held: “As to the present matter, it can be said that the 2Air India v. Nergesh Meerza [(1981) 4 SCC 335]3 Madhu Kishwar & Ors. v. State of Bihar & Ors. [(1996) 5 SCC 125]4Vishaka & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. [(1997) 6 SCC 241]5 CEDAW, entry into force: 1981

9

advancement of the equality of the sexes is today a major goal in the member States of the Co

uncil of Europe.

The Applicants were lawfully and permanently settled in the United Kingdom. All three were

wives whose husbands had been refused permission to remain with or join them in the United

Kingdom in accordance with the 1980 immigration rules applicable at the material time. The

Applicants maintained that there was discrimination on the grounds of sex. The Commission

declared the applications admissible and ordered their joinder.

e) United States v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515 (1996), is a case in which the Supreme Court of the

United States struck down the Virginia Military Institute's long-standing male-only admission

policy in a 7-1 decision.

The other cases which were cited in this case were, Randhir Singh v. Union of India and Ors.

1982 regarding the principle of of 'equal pay for equal work' for both men and women under

Article 39(d) of the Constitution, Githa Hariharan v. Reserve Bank of India 1999, The court

relied upon the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women

1979, CEDAW which directs all State parties to take appropriate measures to prevent

discrimination of ail forms against women

CHAPTER - 6

Conclusion

It was observed, “a person may not have any fundamental right to trade or do business in liquor,

but the person's right to grant employment or seek employment, when a business is carried on in

terms of the provisions of the license, is not regulated." Young men who take a degree or

10

diploma in Hotel Management enter into service at the age of 22 years or 23 years. It, thus,

cannot prohibit employment of men below 25 years. Such a restriction keeping in view a

citizen's right to be considered for employment, which is a facet of the right to livelihood do not

stand judicial scrutiny.

For the reasons aforementioned, the court did not find any infirmity in the impugned decision of

the High Court. The appeal was accordingly dismissed.

Hotel Management has opened up a vista of young men and women for employment. A large

number of them are taking hotel management graduation courses. They pass their examinations

at a very young age. If prohibition in employment of women and men below 25 years is to be

implemented in its letter and spirit, a large section of young graduates who have spent a lot of

time, money and energy in obtaining the degree or diploma in hotel management would be

deprived of their right of employment. When a discrimination is sought to be made on the

purported ground of classification, such classification must be founded on a rational criteria. The

criteria which in absence of any constitutional provision having regard to the societal conditions

as they prevailed in early 20th century, may not be a rational criteria in the 21st century. Instead

of putting curbs on women's freedom, empowerment would be a more tenable and socially wise

approach. This empowerment should reflect in the law enforcement strategies of the state as well

as law modeling done in this behalf. Also with the advent of modern state, new models of

security must be developed. There can be a setting where the cost of security in the establishment

can be distributed between the state and the employer.

Keeping in view the changing global scenario, global changes and outlook in trade and

commerce can be a relevant factor in the interpretation of laws and judgments. With the change

of time, from narrow approach, the court resorted to broad and liberal interpretation.

Bibliography

BOOKS REFERRED

All India Report 2007 Asim Pandya, Writs And Other Constitutional Remedies, 2009 edition

11

Prof. M.P.Jain, INDIAN CONTITUTIONAL LAW, Fifth edition reprint 2009, LexisNexis Butterworths Wadhwa, Butterworths Wadhwa, Nagpur

Prof D.D.Basu, AN INTRODUCTION TO THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 200 Fdition,

J.N.Pandey, THE CONSTITUTIONAL LAW OF INDIA, 45th edition, 2008, Central Law Agency

WEBSITES

www.manupatra.com, accessed on 28 August 2010 www.indiankanoon.com, accessed on 29 August 2010 www.westlaw.com, accessed on 29 August 2010 http://en.wikipedia.org, accessed on 30 August 2010

12