KULDIP KUMAR WADHWA Vs. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment will also dispose of C.W. 13/86 (Shri Anil Kumar v. Commissioner of Police and others) and C.W. 32/86 (Shri O. P. Sahni v .Commissioner of Police and others), as all the petitions involve similar questions.

(2.) The petitioners in all the three petitions had applied for eating house/caberat shows licences under the Regulations framed under Delhi Police Act. The challenge is to the Regulations for Licensing and Controlling of Places of Public Amusement (Other than Cinemas) and Performance of Public Amusement, 1980 as also to the Regulations for the Licensing and Controlling of Places of Public Amusement (Other than Cinemas) and Performance for Public Amusement (Amendment), 1983. The challenge is also to the orders passed by the Licensing Authority refusing to grant the licences arid the Appellate Authority dismissing the appeals. In all the cases the licences were refused mainly on the grounds that the premises were unsafe from fire safety and health and hygiene point of view. In addition in C.W. 24/86 it was refused on the ground that the management was involved in number of criminal cases. According to the petitioners they had removed all the defects as pointed out in the inspection reports carried out by the respondents and the premises were no longer unsafe either from fire point of view or from the point of view of health and hygiene. This Court had directed fresh inspections. However, the fresh inspections also resulted in pointing out the same defects. According to the petitioners they since then removed all those defects and are in a position to get the clearance certificates.

(3.) As regards the challenge to the Regulations as mentioned above the contention is no longer available to the petitioners in view of a Division Bench judgment of this Court in 'Shri A.N. Shervani and another v.L t. Governor and others', 1989(2) Delhi Lawyers 315, wherein the Regulations have been held to be valid.