Plea to formulate policy to permit tapping, sale of toddy in TN
Madurai : Madras high court on Friday sought a response from the state on a plea seeking a direction to the state government to formulate an appropriate policy for permitting the regulated tapping, manufacture, transportation and sale of natural palmyra and coconut toddy in Tamil Nadu .
A division bench of Justice C V Karthikeyan and Justice R Sakthivel was hearing a public interest litigation filed by an advocate G Thirumurugan alias Theeran Thirumurugan.
The petitioner stated that restrictions on toddy tapping were not introduced because the palmyra tree or fresh palm sap was harmful. The prohibition policy was largely influenced by social reform movements, public health concerns, excise policy, and the need to prevent illicit liquor, adulteration and unregulated manufacture. Today, scientific testing, food safety regulations, digital monitoring, laboratory certification, licensing systems, GPS tracking, quality control measures and strict excise supervision are available. Therefore, absolute prohibition is no longer the only available policy option. The state is now in a position to regulate natural toddy through licensing and quality control.
He stated that that several neighbouring states including Kerala, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Goa and the Union Territory of Puducherry permit tapping and sale of natural toddy under statutory licensing systems administered through their respective excise departments. These states have demonstrated that regulation, rather than total prohibition, is capable of balancing public health, revenue, environmental protection and traditional livelihood.
The petitioner stated that because of the continued prohibition, thousands of traditional palm climbers have abandoned their ancestral occupation.
He further stated that if the state can effectively regulate the manufacture and sale of IMFL, beer and wine, there is no legal impediment to examining whether natural toddy can likewise be regulated under a strict licensing regime. Hence, the petitioner moved court.
A division bench of Justice C V Karthikeyan and Justice R Sakthivel was hearing a public interest litigation filed by an advocate G Thirumurugan alias Theeran Thirumurugan.
The petitioner stated that restrictions on toddy tapping were not introduced because the palmyra tree or fresh palm sap was harmful. The prohibition policy was largely influenced by social reform movements, public health concerns, excise policy, and the need to prevent illicit liquor, adulteration and unregulated manufacture. Today, scientific testing, food safety regulations, digital monitoring, laboratory certification, licensing systems, GPS tracking, quality control measures and strict excise supervision are available. Therefore, absolute prohibition is no longer the only available policy option. The state is now in a position to regulate natural toddy through licensing and quality control.
He stated that that several neighbouring states including Kerala, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Goa and the Union Territory of Puducherry permit tapping and sale of natural toddy under statutory licensing systems administered through their respective excise departments. These states have demonstrated that regulation, rather than total prohibition, is capable of balancing public health, revenue, environmental protection and traditional livelihood.
The petitioner stated that because of the continued prohibition, thousands of traditional palm climbers have abandoned their ancestral occupation.
He further stated that if the state can effectively regulate the manufacture and sale of IMFL, beer and wine, there is no legal impediment to examining whether natural toddy can likewise be regulated under a strict licensing regime. Hence, the petitioner moved court.
Next Story