L SUNDARARAJAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner challenges an order passed by the Government rejecting his revision petition and granting a "No Objection Certificate" to the fourth respondent to locate a touring cinema in S. No. 513 /1 (Part), 513 / 2 (part) and 517 (Part) of Avaniapuram Village, Madurai South Taluk.

(2.) Originally the fourth respondent applied to third respondent for the grant of a 'No Objection Certificate' to locate a touring cinema in S. Nos. 513/1 (Part), 513/2 (Part) and 517 (Part) of Avaniapuram Village, Madurai South Taluk. That application was rejected. On appeal to the second respondent, the order of the third respondent (Collector) was set aside and the second respondent granted the 'No Objection Certificate' in favour of the fourth respondent. Against that, the petitioner preferred a revision to the Government which has been rejected.

(3.) The petitioner alleges in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition that he is the licensee of an existing touring cinema in Thirupparankundram and the site preferred by the fourth respondent for locating a touring cinema is very near the petitioner's theatre and is totally unfit for locating a cinema theatre. He also alleges that the site chosen by the fourth respondent is not connected by any public road and is not abutting a public thoroughfare as required by Rules 101 of the Cinema (Regulation) Rules. It is alleged that the orders of the first and the second respondents granting 'No Objection Certificate' to the fourth respondent are liable to be set aside solely on the ground that they have not considered the question of adequacy which was projected by the petitioner. The petitioner alleges that the question of adequacy is one of the relevant considerations which should be considered before granting the 'No Objection Certificate'. The petitioner further alleges that the site chosen by the fourth respondent does not satisfy the requirements of Rule 101 (2) of the Tamil Nadu Cinema (Regulation) Rules. According to the petitioner, apart from the fact that there is no public road leading to the site in question, the site also does not have a road frontage on the public thoroughfare upon which the site abuts. The further allegation made in the affidavit is that the site chosen by the fourth respondent is not suitable for cinema exhibition within the meaning of Section 5(1) of the Tamil Nadu Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1955.