Supreme Court, by an 8:1 majority, ruled that states have control over the production, manufacture, and supply of industrial alcohol. This ruling overturned a 1997 decision, which had given this power to the central government. The case had been sent to a nine-judge bench in 2010 for review.
SC Curtails Centre’s Authority On Industrial Alcohol
Why In News
- Supreme Court, by an 8:1 majority, ruled that states have control over the production, manufacture, and supply of industrial alcohol. This ruling overturned a 1997 decision, which had given this power to the central government. The case had been sent to a nine-judge bench in 2010 for review.
What Are Industrial Alcohols
- An Impure Form Of Ethanol Used In Industry, Generally As A Solvent, But Not Suitable For Human Consumption. To Avoid Unauthorised Consumption, Industrial Alcohol Is Also Sold With A Nauseous Substance Added To Make It Undrinkable. Such Alcohol Is Also Known As Denatured Alcohol.
About The Case
- Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, writing for himself and seven other judges, declared that the central government does not possess regulatory authority over industrial alcohol. He mentioned that industrial alcohol falls under Entry 8 of List II of the Constitution, which pertains to intoxicating liquors, and cannot be taken over by Parliament under Entry 52 of List I.
- According to the ruling, states retain the power to legislate on intoxicating liquor, which includes industrial alcohol. Justice BV Nagarathna provided the sole dissenting opinion, arguing that the states lack the authority to regulate industrial alcohol.
- Under the Constitution’s 7th Schedule, Entry 8 of the State List grants states the authority to legislate on the manufacture, transport, and sale of intoxicating liquors. Conversely, Entry 52 of the Union List and Entry 33 of the Concurrent List allow Parliament to regulate industries in the public interest. However, this ruling affirms that industrial alcohol, which is not intended for human consumption, remains within the jurisdiction of the states.
- Supreme Court overruled a 1990 seven-judge bench decision in Synthetics and Chemicals case which held to the contrary and held in favour of the Centre by ruling that states cannot claim to regulate industrial alcohol even under the Concurrent List.
- In 1997, the seven-judge bench ruled that the Centre had the regulatory power over the production of industrial alcohol. The case was referred to the nine-judge bench in 2010.
- The majority ruling was given by CJI DY Chandrachud, justices Hrishikesh Roy, AS Oka, JB Pardiwala, Ujjal Bhuyan, Manoj Misra, SC Sharma and AG Masih.
- The dissenting opinion was given by justice BV Nagarathna, who held that Centre alone, will have the legislative power to regulate industrial alcohol.
- Industrial alcohol is not meant for human consumption.
