The Kerala High Court has struck down a rule prohibiting women from working in toddy shops, holding that the blanket restriction violates the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution. Justice Gopinath P. ruled that concerns about women's workplace safety cannot justify excluding them altogether from an employment opportunity.
In its August 5, 2026 judgment in Sophy v. State of Kerala & Others, the Court declared Rule 7(37) of the Kerala Abkari Shops Disposal Rules, 2002, unconstitutional and directed that the petitioner's claim for employment be considered without applying the invalidated provision.
Background
The petitioner, Sophy, approached the High Court after her husband, K.J. Kunjupalu, who worked at Toddy Shop No. 148 in Ponjanam, Thrissur district, died on May 20, 2024. She sought employment at the same shop on compassionate grounds under an industrial settlement governing the toddy-tapping industry.
Her request was denied because Rule 7(37) prohibited women from being employed in toddy shops in any capacity. She challenged the provision, arguing that it violated her constitutional rights to equality and employment.
The Court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Anuj Garg v. Hotel Association of India, which emphasised that workplace safety should not become a justification for excluding women from employment.
Justice Gopinath observed that the restriction was neither justified in principle nor proportionate. The State had argued that the rule protected women from harassment, particularly because toddy shops could be located in remote areas. However, the Court found no sufficient basis for a blanket prohibition.
The judgment stated,
"Instead of prohibiting the employment of women in toddy shops altogether, the State should focus on factoring in ways through which unequal consequences of sex differences can be eliminated."
The Court further observed that the State must create safe working conditions rather than prevent women from choosing their preferred occupations.
Rejecting the argument that liquor trade falls outside ordinary commercial rights, the Court held that regulation of liquor cannot automatically justify restrictions on employment opportunities.
The High Court declared Rule 7(37) unconstitutional for violating Articles 14, 15, 19 and 21 of the Constitution. It also held that any licence condition based on the invalidated rule could not be sustained and directed that Sophy's employment claim be considered without applying that provision.
The writ petition was allowed.
