R. THIRUMOORTHY Vs. COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE third respondent herein applied for the grant of a 'no objection certificate' on 11th June, 1973 and the same was granted by the Collector of Coimbatore by order dated 1st September, 1973. Meanwhile, the petitioner sent an objection petition to the Collector which was received by the Collector on 24th July, 1973. From the order of the Board of Revenue in this case it is clear that after receipt of the objection petition, the same was not traceable in the office of the Collector and consequently the Collector proceeded to grant the 'no -objection certificate' to the third respondent as if there were no objections. On 22nd March, 1974, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the Board of Reveune, and the Board of Revenue, by their order dated 18th April, 1974, rejected the appeal as time -barred. It is to quash this order of the Board of Revenue this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed.

(2.) THE Board of Revenue took the view that since the petitioner's objection -petition was not in the file of the Collector, the Collector was not bound to send a copy of his order granting the 'no objection certificate' to the third respondent, to the petitioner herein, and consequently the period of limitation of thirty days prescribed by rule 45 of the Tamil Nadu Cinema Regulation Rules should be calculated from the date of the order itself and therefore the appeal filed on 22nd March, 1974, i.e., more than six and a half months after the grant of the 'no objection certificate, was barred by limitation.

(3.) HOWEVER , the real question for consideration is whether the appeal filed by the petitioner before the Board of Revenue was barred by limitation, or not. As I pointed out already, the appeal was filed on 22nd March, 1974. Rule 45 of the Tamil Nadu Cinema Regulation Rules provides for a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the copy of the order for filing an appeal. When the copy of the order was not received by the petitioner, the period of limitation should be calculated from the date when he came to 'know' of the order of the Collector granting 'no objection certificate' to the third respondent on the basis of the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Raja Harish Chandra Raj Singh v. The Deputy Land Acquisition Officer and Anr. : [1962]1SCR676 . In this case on 31st January, 1974, the petitioner has filed an objection -petition to the Collector when the third respondent had applied for the grant of a 'C -form licence'. In that objection -petition, the petitioner stated as follows: