A section of people, mostly localities, are protesting Liquor Shops in district Uttarkashi. With 5 new liquor shops opened this year, the liquor shop count in the District has increased to 17.
What is reasoning is being put forward to ban liquor shops in Uttarkashi?
That Uttarkashi is a religious place, home to Yamunotri and Gangotri and dozens of other ancient temples. That’s why ban liquor sale in the city of Uttarkashi and elsewhere.
Liquor Sale through Mobile vans
To placate the disappointment, the District Administration has decided to sell Liquor though Mobile Vans.
Banning liquor (beverages such as alcohol, beer etc.) is often one sided and somewhat partial. In addition, it’s ineffective.
Uttarkashi or for that matter any other district can be a religious place. But that doesn’t mean people consuming liquor are not there. Such people, irrespective of how you see the act, have some rights as well. Banning liquor in any place only increases the Black marketing.
There’s another perspective of looking at the protests as well
Many groups have vested interests served by seeing a blanket ban on liquor sale in any place. These are hoteliers, Guest house owners, tour operators, camp owners and any one into the hospitality business. When a tourist demands liquor or non-vegetarian food in a religious place, he/she is provided the same at an exorbitant price. You may not agree, but studies have proved that making a place a dry area doesn’t decrease liquor consumption. In fact, it only increases the parasitic middlemen, police gaining from the unavailability.
From the past 20 years, temple building has become an equally enticing business in religious places. The religious trusts are not taxed, that’s why they are an easy money spinner. Every street or lane in such religious places has at least one temple. Does that mean there will be no meat, fish or egg shop near on the street?
It has become a habit of seeing Liquor banning protests from one perspective only -- The perspective of the group demanding a ban. What about the rights of those who every right to consume liquor or non-vegetarian food? In contrast to those people who are benefiting from such bans (temple owners, hoteliers etc.), all such people want is enjoy a peg or two in a leisurely manner. Why make the entire process tough on both money and mental peace.
There are logical ways of maintaining the character of a religious place
Open liquor Shops that are veiled. Why do we have a liquor shop which has an open counter, with flashy billboard, overlooking the road?
Why can’t the liquor shop be properly veiled?
Cities must have sections earmarked for non-vegetarian food and Liquor Sale
Why? As there’s consumption. Studies shows nearly sixty percent of people in India are non- vegetarians. About 20-30 percent of people consume liquor in some form. Even those who vouch for liquor ban, for various reasons, sometimes consume it in privacy of their homes or other places.
Which came first must be the rule
It’s logical not to have a liquor shop near a school (although I don’t agree whether Hospitals must be put in that list); but the test here must be: Which among the two came first?
Actually this test applies to residences as well. If a liquor shop came at a certain place first, then it’s the responsibility of the administration of the Government not to allow a school in any law defined vicinity of it.
It’s really possible to have liquor shops and non-vegetarian shops in a religious place and still maintain the religious character of the place. It will allow the state of Uttarakhand to serve its tourists better (many of who are flocking Uttarakhand for Adventure Activities). It will be less hassle and money spends for locals as well. And we shouldn’t bother too much about the nuisance, as a nuisance creator is the same everywhere, irrespective of whether he/she lives in a religious place or a non-religious one.
Fixed Liquor shops are always better than Mobile Vans
A liquor van can be placed anywhere.
Over the years, I have seen visibly double standards in the country. This makes us vouch for something in public, only because it serves our vested interest; Or if we have resources to practice that in private. This is not GOOD. If buying something becomes illegal simply because the place prohibits that, then there’s nothing wrong in demanding availability of it (especially when one consumes it).
Not to say much, this is a concluding thought for you: Making Dry Area doesn’t decrease Liquor consumption. It doesn’t decrease the number of family feuds, and young people consuming liquor as well. It only increases the money wastage on the habit.
PS: Is it wrong to have Liquor shops in the following cities and towns of Uttarkashi? Ambedkar Nagar, Chinyalisaun, Nalupaani, Dinda, Bhatwari, Naugaon, Badkot, Joshivada etc.
If Army personnel in Uttarakhand are allowed to take their monthly Liquor quota to their villages and towns, then how can liquor sale is unjustified there? Tell you, Army liquor has a real sociological impact on Uttarakhand. We need to study that as well, if we want to understand the prevalence of liquor in Uttarakhand, including Uttarkashi.
Ever since Rubi Chowdhary “Fake IAS inside Lal Bahudur Shastri Administration Academy, Mussoorie” came to prominence, one thing remained unclear.
Why not not a single person from LBSAA Administration got detained or charge-sheeted?, that too when Rubi Chowdhary was living in the Academy for the past six months.
No one is saying why Police arrested Rubi. The question is: Why Police didn't arrest even a single person from LABSAA Administration?
The way Rubi Chowdhary Fake IAS case is being handled, it appears more aimed at intimidating Rubi Chowdhary.
What does Police want to prove? That Rubi Chowdhary is one person Army, who can get everything she wants for her stay at Country’s top Administrative Academy.
It’s amazing how Rubi managed to get fake ID cards, IAS probationers’ book kit and is even seen among Probationers in the Photo with President of India.
Ideally LABSAA should have suspended some of its officials, for suspicion of having any links to the issue. This would have ensured transparent investigation. How can anyone get transparent deal, when suspected people are still holding the chairs.
If police can put Rubi Chowdhary in jail, then they can ask for preventive detention of the suspected LABSAA officials as well. This would have ensured no undue influence and tempering with the evidence. This can be never be ensured, if such officials remain in their chair.
Police is seeing the case from one perspective only.
Last Date to apply for Lecturer posts in Uttarakhand Government Polytechnics: May 02
Uttarakhand Public Service Commission (UKPSC), Ayog Bhawan, Gurukul Kangri, Haridwar, Uttarakhand-249404, invites Online applications for the Lecturer posts in Government Polytechnics in the state of Uttarakhand. The lecturer posts will be filled through Uttarakhand PSC Combined recruitment examination. Below are the key details :
Lecturers Posts in Uttarakhand Government Polytechnics
154 posts in various departments / disciplines of Government of Uttarakhand
Polytechnic Lecturer Pay Scale
Rs. 15600-39100, grade pay Rs. 5400/-
Polytechnic Lecturer Age Limit
21-42 years as on 01/07/2015.
How to Apply : Apply Online at Uttarakhand PSC website from 16/04/2015 to 02/05/2015 only.
For more job advertisement details, job advertisement and to apply online: