RAMAKANTHI TALKIES Vs. DIST. MAGISTRATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As a common question of law arises for determination in these cases, I propose to dispose of them by a common order.

(2.) In these petitions under Art. 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners have challenged the action of the District Magistrate, South Kanara (hereinafter referred to as the D. M.) directing them to replace the existing seats in lower classes by cushion seats or alternatively reduce their rates.

(3.) Among others, the petitioners are running permanent cinema theatres in the City of Mangalore by obtaining renewal of licences under the provisions of the Karnataka Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1964 and the rules framed thereunder (hereinafter referred to as the Act and the Rules). When their licences were due to expire for the calendar year 1976, the petitioners approached the D.M. for renewal of their licences on which he inspected the theatres and inter alia directed the petitioners to replace the seats in lower classes with cushion seats or alternatively reduce their rates on or before 31-12-1976. After extending the time from time to time, on 31-3-1977 the D.M. extended the time upto 30-4 1977 for the said purpose. On 19-4-1977, the petitioners approached this Court challenging the action of the D.M. and obtained stay of operation of the impugned direction, as a result of which the D.M. has been renewing the licences without insisting on the directions issued by him.