The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Friday directed the State to file a report on a public interest litigation petition seeking a direction to the government to review the policy governing prohibition of palmyra and coconut toddy, and formulate an appropriate one for permitting regulated tapping, manufacture, transportation and sale of toddy.

The direction was issued by a Division Bench of Justices C.V. Karthikeyan and R. Sakthivel which was hearing a petition filed by advocate Theeran Thirumurugan of Madurai., who said the petition was not for promoting alcoholism or seeking unrestricted sale of liquor, but only to seek a direction to the State to reconsider the policy and frame a scientific regulatory mechanism for natural toddy, like the systems prevailing in several other States.

He said the palmyra tree (Borassus flabellifer) was the State tree of Tamil Nadu. For centuries, it had been regarded as the ‘Tree of Life’ because every part of it was useful. It provided food, shelter, medicine, fibre, timber, palm leaves, palm jaggery, palm candy, palm sugar, handicrafts, fresh palm sap (padaneer) and natural toddy. Thousands of rural families traditionally depended on the tree for their livelihood.

Prohibition policy was introduced as part of a broader prohibition regime to curb excessive consumption of intoxicants, illicit distillation and adulteration. It was not based on any finding that regulated natural toddy, produced under scientific standards, could never be permitted. With advancements in food safety, laboratory testing and excise administration, the State was now in a position to regulate natural toddy through licensing and quality control, he said.

For several decades, various farmers’ associations, palm climbers’ organisations, social organisations and political parties had repeatedly submitted representations and conducted peaceful agitations requesting regulated permission for toddy tapping. But, no comprehensive policy review had been undertaken, he said.

The original reasons for prohibition had substantially changed. Today, scientific testing, food safety regulations, digital monitoring, laboratory certification, licensing systems, GPS tracking, quality control measures and strict excise supervision were available. Therefore, absolute prohibition was no longer the only available policy option, he added.

Authorities had failed to periodically review whether the original reasons for prohibition justified an absolute ban in present context. If the State could regulate manufacture and sale of the IMFL, there was no legal impediment to examining whether natural toddy could also be regulated, he said.

The court posted the matter to September 15.

Published - August 07, 2026 08:39 pm IST