Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(3) "No service shall be allowed in any smoking area or space provided for smoking"
It is stated that in view of the amendment to sub-Rule (3) of Rule 4 of the Rules, the petitioner can not serve tobacco related products i.e. hookah tobacco to its customers even in the smoking zone allocated for that purpose. That the petitioner is not entitled to take shelter on the decision of the Supreme Court in NARINDER S CHADHA vs. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI,1 as amendment to sub-Rule (3) of Rule 4 of the Rules is brought in the year 2017. That numerous complaints against the hookah centres/coffee shops are received complaining statutory violations and the Police are keeping surveillance over all the hookah centres/coffee shops and conducting checks to ensure for any minor children below the age of 18 years are being allowed and see that the hookah centres do not conduct business beyond permitted hours of business. That in order to prevent the Police from taking any legal action in the event of any unlawful activities going on, under the guise of hookah centres, the petitioner filed the present writ petition with false and baseless allegations. That universally tobacco is regarded as one of the major public health hazards and it is responsible directly or indirectly for an estimated 8 lakhs deaths annually in the country. It has been found that in the treatment of the tobacco related diseases and the loss of productivity in the LAWS (SC) 2014 1214 country is much more than all the benefits recurring in the form of revenue and employment generated by the tobacco industry. That the managements of these hookah centres are learnt to have been earning disproportionate profits by charging Rs.500 to Rs.1,500/- from each of the customer of hookah without a time limit. Continuous exposure of youth to smoking for hours together without a time limit, by taking advantage of their adolescent age will adversely impact on public health negating the objectives sought to be achieved by law. That the relief sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.