ANANDA RAO Vs. JOINT COLLECTOR WEST GODAVARI ELURU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ch. Ananda Rao, the petitioner in Writ Petition Nos. 5303 and 6352 of 1983 is the owner of an extent of 1 acrein R.S.No.18/2A1 of Govaravaram Village, Eluru Taluk, West Godavari Dist. He made an application to the Joint Collector, Eluru, the Licensing Authority under the A.P.Cinemas (Regulation) Act and the Rules made thereunder (hereafter called the Act the Rules) for permission to construct a cinema hall in the said land. By proceedings dt 29-4-83, the Licensing Authority accorded permission. On 3-5-83, the Principal, St. Therisas College, Eluru the 2nd respondent made a representation that the land on which permission was granted for construction of the cinema theatre was included in the mast plan prepared under the Town Planning Act, that the area was earmarked as a residential zone where construction of cinema halls is prohibited, that there are educational institutions, a college and a Hostel for Women nearby and that it would be a perpetual nuisance if theatre comes up in that area. A further representation was made to the same effect on 29-6-1983. Thereupon, the Licensing Authority by his proceedings dt. 28-6-83 directed the petitioner to stop further construction observing that the permission granted earlier was illegal in as much as the Director of Town Planning was not consulted as required under R.9(2) of the Rules since the land is covered by a Town Planning scheme and that he was not aware of the same when he granted the permission. He also directed the petitioner to file two sets of plan for sending the same to the Director of Town Planning for his views.

(2.) Challenging the said order, the petitioner filed these two writ petitions mainly contending that the Licensing Authority having granted permission has no jurisdiction or power to stop construction. Permission once granted cannot be cancelled or revoked unless there is a specific provision empowering him to do so. S.10 which deals with revocation or suspension of licence has no application to revocation or suspension of permits as licence and permission are two different and distinct matters. Even if S.10 is held to be applicable, the power is conditional and can be exercised only on the grounds mentioned therein, namely, where the licence has been obtained by misrepresentation or fraud or where the licensee failed to comply with any of the provisions of the Act and the Rules made thereunder, or any of the conditions or restrictions upon or subject to which the licence has been granted and the said power be exercised only after giving an opportunity to show cause why the permission should not be cancelled. The impugned proceedings directing the petitioner to stop further construction amounts to suspension of the licence and is therefore illegal and without jurisdiction.

(3.) Before dealing with these contentions, I would refer to Writ Petition No.9614 of 1983 which relates to the same matter. The petitioner in writ petition No.9614 of 1983 is M/s East India Commercial Company Private Limited., the Company purchased an extent of 3 acres in RS.18/2A2 in Gavaravaram village for construction of its staff quarters. This land is just opposite to the land on which permission was granted for construction of the cinema theatre to the petitioner in the other two Writ Petitions. The petitioner challenges the proceedings dt. 29-4-83 granting permission for construction of a Cinema Theatre mainly on the grounds that the land is situated on a residential zone and no permission could be given for construction of a cinema theatre, that the permission was granted contrary to the provisions of R.9(2) of the Rules, that the petitioner in the other two Writ Petitions was fully aware of the fact that the land was situated in residential zone as he himself prepared a lay out for residential plots and got approval of the Director of Town Planning in LP177/80 and in one of the plots he had also constructed a residential building.