SIDDEGOWDA Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE MANDYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The no objection certificate issued by the 1st respondent in exercise of the power conferred on him under the provisions of the Karnataka Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1964, and the Karnataka Cinemas (Regulation) Rules, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act' and the 'Rules') to the 2nd respondent-C. Hemanthakumar, has been challenged in both these petitions. The copy of the same has been produced as Annexures-C and D in Writ Petition No. 15833 of 1994 and as Annexures-O and P in Writ Petition No. 9582 of 1994. Since common grievance has been made by the petitioners in these petitions, they are taken up for final hearing and disposed of by this common order.

(2.) The petitioners in Writ Petition No. 15833 of 1994 claim to be permanent residents of Thaggahalli Village, Mandya Taluk, Mandya District. It is their contention that the distances between their residential buildings and the site bearing No. 123 of 6 of Thaggahalli Village, where the 2nd respondent has proposed to put up a cinema theatre is about fifteen feet; and since the 2nd respondent has already established a rice mill with all equipments and a drying yard and also a sugarcane crusher in the land bearing Survey No. 123/6, if the 2nd respondent is permitted to put up a cinema theatre on the said site, it will result in severe injury to them, and resulting in health hazard; and since there was no publication in the local newspaper inviting objections by the 1st respondent as required under Rule 111-J of the rules, the petitioners could not file their objections before the 1st respondent objecting for the grant of no objection certificate to the 2nd respondent. According to them, the publication inviting objections in a daily newspaper known as "Kolalu" is no publication at all in the eye of law as only a few copies of the said newspaper are printed; and though the application filed by the 2nd respondent was published in "Deccan Herald", the petitioners who do not know English language were not aware of the said publication made in "Deccan Herald".

(3.) The 1st petitioner in Writ Petition No. 9582 of 1994 has been carrying on business by establishing a touring talkies in Thaggahalli Village itself. The 2nd petitioner is also carrying on business in touring cinema in a place known as Mangala Village which is a neighbouring village of Thaggahalli Village. According to the petitioners, the cinema theatre of the 2nd petitioner is situated within a distance of about one hundred and forty meters from the site where the 2nd respondent had proposed to establish his cinema theatre. The petitioners 3 to 5 in this petition (Writ Petition No. 9582 of 1994) claim to be having their residential premises very close to the proposed cinema theatre. It is the case of these petitioners that they have filed their objections before the 1st respondent objecting to the grant of no objection certificate to the 2nd respondent on various grounds, and the 1st respondent without any justification in disregard of Rule 27(1)(e) of the rules granted the no objection certificate to the petitioners.