1. W.P.(C) No.16163 of 2024 has been filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:-

“i. call for the records leading to Ext.P1 order and quash the same to the extent that it seeks to impose closure of the petitioners' establishments from 17.04.2024 to 19.04.2024 in connection with the General Elections to the Lok Sabha in the State of Tamil Nadu and Bye-Elections in Vilavancode Assembly Constituency of the same State by issuing a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction;

ii. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 1st respondent to ensure that no officer of the State Government passes any order affecting the functioning of the petitioners Hotels beyond the statutory ambit and scope of Section 135C of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 or Rule 28A (v) or (vi) of the Foreign Liquor Rules, 1953;

iii. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding respondents 1 to 5 not to include the petitioners viz. (i) Hotel Emperor, Sulthan Bathery (ii) The Resort, Sulthan Bathery, (iii) Saugandhika West Gate, Sulthan Bathery and (iv) Hotel Indriya Wayanad, Kalpetta in any order passed under Section 135C of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 or Rule 28A (v) or (vi) of the Foreign Liquor Rules, 1953 directing closure in connection with the General Elections to the Lok Sabha in the State of Tamil Nadu and the Bye-Elections in Vilavancode Assembly Constituency of the same State, from 17.04.2024 to 19.04.2024; and (iv) grant such other and further reliefs as deemed fit and proper for this Hon’ble Court to award the costs of this Writ Petition.”

2. W.P.(C) No.16216 of 2024 has been filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:-

“i. call for the records leading to the issuance of Exts.P1, P2 and P6 orders and quash the same to the extent that they seek to impose closure of petitioners establishments from 17.04.2024 to 19.04.2024 in connection with the General Elections to the Lok Sabha in the State of Tamil Nadu and 29-Mahe Assembly Segment as well as the Bye- Elections in Vilavancode Assembly Constituency of Kanyakumari District by issuing a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction;

ii. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 1st respondent to ensure that no officer of the State Government passes any order affecting the functioning of the petitioners Hotels beyond the statutory ambit and scope of Section 135C of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 or Rule 28A (v) or (vi) of the Foreign Liquor Rules, 1953;

iii. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding respondents 1 to 5 not to include the petitioners in any order passed under Section 135C of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 or Rule 28A (v) or (vi) of the Foreign Liquor Rules, 1953 directing closure in connection with the General Elections to the Lok Sabha in the State of Tamil Nadu and 29-Mahe Assembly Segment as well as the Bye-Elections in Vilavancode Assembly Constituency of the Kanyakumari District, from 17.04.2024 to 19.04.2024;

iv. issue a writ of mandamus to direct respondents 1 and 2 to grant remission of the Licence fee for the days on which closure is ordered without the authority of law and also grant compensation as deemed reasonable by this Hon’ble Court for the loss and damage sustained by the petitioners and

v. to dispense with the translation of vernacular documents;

iv grant such other and further reliefs as deemed fit and proper for this Hon’ble Court and

vi. to award the costs of this Writ Petition.”

3. The petitioners in both the writ petitions are owners of Bar Hotels functioning in Kerala. The respondents in the wake of General Elections to the Lok Sabha in the State of Tamil Nadu and Bye-Elections in Vilavancode Assembly Constituency, passed orders directing closure of the Bar Hotels from 17.04.2024 to 19.04.2024.

4. The petitioners submit that the power of the respondents under Section 135C of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 would be confined to the polling area where Elections are held. In the case of the petitioners, in respect of certain Elections to be held in Tamil Nadu State, Hotels of the petitioners in Kerala State are directed to be shut down for three days. This is highly illegal and arbitrary.

5. In W.P.(C) No.16163 of 2024, the petitioners seek to quash Ext.P1 order in so far as it seek to impose closure of the petitioners' establishments from 17.04.2024 to 19.04.2024. In W.P.(C) No.16216 of 2024, the petitioners have made a further prayer to grant remission of the licence fee for the days on which closure is ordered without the authority of law and also to grant compensation as deemed reasonable by this Court for the loss and damage sustained by the petitioners.

6. Standing Counsel entered appearance on behalf of the Election Commission of India and resisted the writ petition. On behalf of the respondents, it is submitted that the representations were received by the Election Commission from Bar Hotel owners and thereafter, the area of prohibition was confined to 5 Kilometres from the borders of the respective Constituencies. The step was taken at the instances of the Bar Hotel owners and therefore they cannot raise any grievance now.

7. Standing Counsel further pointed out that dehors Section 135C, the Election Commission of India has powers under Article 324 of the Constitution of India to regulate conduct of General Elections. Under the Constitution of India, the Election Commission has to take such measures in order to ensure peaceful Elections in the Country. The power of the Election Commission cannot be questioned as it is supported by Constitution of India.

8. Senior Government Pleader entered appearance and resisted the writ petitions. Senior Government Pleader relying on Ext.P1 Government Order dated 11.04.2024, pointed out that the prohibition for sale of liquor was curtailed in view of the General Elections to Lok Sabha, 2024 and Bye-Elections to Vilavancode Assembly Constituency of Kanyakumari District. The prohibition was not an all time ban for all the liquor shops. It was confined to the bordering areas of Tamil Nadu and was made at the instance of a constitutional body like Election Commission of India. Furthermore, as the period of ban has already expired, the writ petitions have become infructuous.

9. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners, the learned Government Pleader representing respondents 1, 2 and 5 and the learned Standing Counsel representing respondents 3 and 4.

10. The writ petitions were filed by the petitioners on 18.04.2024 and 19.04.2024 against the orders of the respondents, prohibiting sale of liquor in bordering areas of Tamil Nadu from 17.04.2024 to 19.04.2024. The ban period is over and therefore, the writ petitions have become infructuous. However, the petitioners have a case that the banning of sale of liquor in the adjacent or adjoining State, is beyond the powers of the respondents under Section 135C of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Therefore, the petitioners are entitled to remission of licence fee and compensation for loss of business.

11. As far as compensation for loss of business, I am of the view that the petitioners have to approach the competent Civil Court since the dispute is of a civil nature involving commercial interest. As far as remission of fee, the petitioners in W.P.(C) No.16216 of 2024 have filed Ext.P5 representation which inter alia seeks remission of licence fee. Taking into consideration the facts of the case, the writ petitions are disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P5 representation submitted by the petitioners and take appropriate decision thereon in accordance with law.