Concepts & More v. Palike, et al.
Concepts & More v. Palike, et al., WP No. 16820, High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore (2012).
- Mar 8, 2012
- High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore
- Concepts & More
- Mahtani Enterprises
- Mahtani Ventures
- Mohteshim Shadab
- One World Impex Pvt. Ltd.
- Prem Kumar V.
- Bruhath Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike
- Health Officer
Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003
Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976
Type of Litigation
Challenge to Government Policies Relating to Tobacco Control/Public Health
Tobacco companies or front groups may challenge any legislative or regulatory measure that affects their business interests. Unlike public interest litigation, these cases seek to weaken health measures. These cases frequently involve the industry proceeding against the government. For example, a group of restaurant owners challenging a smoke free law as unconstitutional.
Tobacco Control Topics
Smoke Free Measures
Measures to reduce or eliminate exposure to tobacco smoke. (See FCTC Art. 8)
Right to Commerce
A violation of the right to carry on trade, business, or profession of a person’s choice. This right may also be called the right to free enterprise or economic freedom. The industry may argue that a business should be able to conduct its business without government regulation, including whether or not to be smoke free.
Type of Tobacco Product
Hookah, shisha, and water pipes
A single or multi-stemmed instrument for vaporizing and smoking flavored tobacco (shisha or sheesha) or other products in which the vapor or smoke is passed through a water basin ‒ often glass-based ‒ before inhalation. Water pipes are known by a variety of names such as hookah, huqqah, nargilah, nargile, arghila, and qalyan.
Concepts & More (Concepts), et al., hookah bar owners, sued the Health Officer of Bruhath Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) to stop BBMP from interfering with their right to sell hookah. Concepts claimed that BBMP cannot regulate Concepts' hookah business as hookah is regulated pursuant to India's national omnibus tobacco control law, COTPA. BBMP contended that it possesses jurisdiction to cancel Concepts & More's trade license. The Court observed that the power to cancel a business license is a quasi-judicial power which has to be exercised by the Commissioner. The Court further held that judicial power cannot ordinarily be delegated without the law's express or clear implication. The Court declared that the power to cancel the licenses cannot be inferred and that BBMP did not have the authority to cancel licenses. The Court allowed Concepts' writ petition and quashed BBMP's orders that cancelled the business licenses.