The Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council (KHADC) has shut Blinkit’s operations in Shillong, The Shillong Times reported, after refusing the quick commerce firm the trading licence it needs to operate its Jingkieng Nongthymmai premises. The council derives that power from Paragraph 10 of the Sixth Schedule, which allows it to bar any non-tribal from carrying on wholesale or retail business in the district without its clearance. Blinkit had cleared central and state legal requirements to operate, but the local council still stopped it.
Chief Executive Member Winston Tony Lyngdoh said the council would not grant a licence to any platform whose business model threatens indigenous traders, pointing to more than 4,000 grocery stores in Shillong.
On Blinkit’s stalled entry:
- The KHADC earlier refused Swiggy Instamart a licence for the same reason.
- Blinkit secured a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the Nongrim Hills traditional bodies, but the council did not treat it as a substitute for the trading licence.
- Blinkit began preliminary operations with hundreds of delivery partners, but suspended them after failing to obtain the licence.
How far does the council’s licensing power actually reach? The Trading by Non-Tribals Regulation, 1954 covers the whole Khasi Hills district. Paragraph 20 of the Sixth Schedule appears to exempt the Shillong municipality, but the Supreme Court settled that in 2002, ruling that non-tribal traders in the city’s municipal areas still require the council’s licence.
What remains unsettled is how far that licensing power extends. A June 20 amendment would require a separate licence for every non-tribal employee a firm hires. Cabinet minister Sanbor Shullai has asked the Governor to block the amendment, arguing that Paragraph 10 empowers the council to license trade, not employment.
Why is Blinkit’s model already under scrutiny elsewhere? Blinkit shifted to an inventory-led model from September 2025, owning and stocking goods in its dark stores instead of operating as a neutral marketplace. Three regulators are examining different aspects of the model:
- Competition: The CCI is examining a complaint by the All India Consumer Products Distributors Federation (AICPDF), which alleges that Blinkit’s pricing practices are predatory and undercut kirana stores.
- Foreign investment: In 2024, the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT) met Blinkit, Zepto and Swiggy Instamart to examine whether they had breached FDI rules, which allow full foreign investment in marketplace models but prohibit it in inventory-led operations. Blinkit’s parent, Eternal, later restructured into an Indian-owned and controlled company, capping foreign ownership at 49.5% to legally hold inventory.
- Local trade: The KHADC raised the same livelihood concerns highlighted by the AICPDF, but acted through its licensing powers rather than a competition probe.
What does Meghalaya…
Source link
Disclaimer
We strive to uphold the highest ethical standards in all of our reporting and coverage. We blogs.grocliq.com want to be transparent with our readers about any potential conflicts of interest that may arise in our work. It’s possible that some of the investors we feature may have connections to other businesses, including competitors or companies we write about. However, we want to assure our readers that this will not have any impact on the integrity or impartiality of our reporting. We are committed to delivering accurate, unbiased news and information to our audience, and we will continue to uphold our ethics and principles in all of our work. Thank you for your trust and support.
Website Upgradation is going on for any glitch kindly connect at [email protected]
