SRINIVAS CHITRA MANDIRA Vs. GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) "This Hon'ble High Court may be pleased to declare and strike down the expression before the date of commencement of the Karnataka Cinemas (Regulation) (Amendment) Rules, 1978 (hereinafter in this Rule referred to as the Amendment rules)" in Rule 105(1) as null and void for want of previous Publication. 2). This Hon'ble High Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a direction in the nature of a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to apply Rule 105 of the rules without reference to the expression "before the date of commencement of the Karnataka Cinemas (Regulation) (Amendment) Rules, 1978 on the ground that rule 105(1) has referred to non-existent Rules. "a) This Hon'ble High Court may be pleased to declare and strike down the expression "before the date of commence- ment of the Karnataka Cinemas (Regulation) (Amendment) Rule, 1978 (here- in- after in this rule referred as the Amend- ment Rule)" in Rule 105(1) of the Rule as violative of Article 14 of the Constitution". "b) This Hon'ble High Court may be pleased to declare that the expression "amendment rules" wherever it appears in 105 refers to Karnataka Cinemas (Regulation) (Amendment) Rules, 1987." 3). This Hon'ble High Court may be pleased to declare and strike down the words "before the date of commencement of the Amendment rules" in Rule 105(6) of the rules as violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. 4). This Hon'ble High Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a direction in the nature of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to deem the touring Cinema licence granted to the Petitioner as void for a period of one year ending on 12-3-1988. 5). This Hon'ble High Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a direction in the nature of a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to treat the petitioner's Application for conversion filed under Rule 105 as an application for semi permanent Cinema licence and dispose of the same in accordance with law."

(2.) In W.P.No.12525/87, the Petitioner has sought for the following reliefs:

(3.) Even though the reliefs sought for in these petitions are not identical, but the same are heard together as the contentions raised are common.