No illegality in use of plastic HEAL stickers on liquor bottles: Gauhati High Court

Staff Reporter

GUWAHATI: A division bench of the Gauhati High Court comprising Chief Justice Vijay Bishnoi and Justice Suman Shyam ruled that “there is no illegality in the action of the Excise Department in allowing the manufacturers to use plastic-made HEAL stickers on the liquor bottles as the Relevant Rules do not prohibit the use of plastic-made HEAL stickers.”

The petitioner, Dhrubajyoti Borah, through a PIL (55/2023), raised his grievance that the state government is allowing plastic holographic excise adhesive labels (in short, “HEAL”) stickers pasted in each and every Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) bottle. The contention of the petitioner is that use of plastic material is prohibited under the Plastic Waste Management Rules, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the “2016 Rules”), and therefore, the action of the Excise Department to allow the manufacturers to paste plastic HEAL stickers on every IMFL bottle is illegal.

Counter affidavits have been filed on behalf of the Excise Department as well as the Pollution Control Board, in which it is highlighted that in the 2016 Rules, the use of plastic HEAL stickers is not prohibited. The petitioner has submitted that several other states are using paper-made HEAL stickers, and therefore, directions should be issued to the state government to allow the manufacturers of IMFL bottles to use paper-made HEAL stickers instead of plastic-made HEAL stickers on IMFL bottles.

“Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after going through the pleadings, we are of the view that if the provisions of the 2016 Rules do not prohibit the use of plastic-made HEAL stickers, it cannot be said that there is any illegality in the action of the Excise Department in allowing the manufacturers to use plastic-made HEAL stickers on the liquor bottles. So far as the prayer of the petitioner for directing the state authorities to start manufacturing or circulating paper-made HEAL stickers is concerned, the petitioner can very well approach the state government with appropriate representation seeking redressal of his grievance,” the Court said.

At this stage, the petitioner prayed that he wanted to withdraw this PIL petition with the liberty to approach the state government for redressal of his grievance.

This led the Court to dismiss the PIL as withdrawn with liberty, as prayed for.

 Also Read: Assam bans liquor sales and consumption during vote counting across state (sentinelassam.com)

Also Watch: