BHARTI SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ application filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner prays for issue of a writ of certiorari quashing the order of the State Government (respondent No. 1) dated 28th of Nov., 1980, which is said to have been passed by the Minister of Local Self Government, Bihar, as contained in Annexure 1 by which a direction has been issued to issue the licence of Shri Krishna Talkies, Samastipur, in the name of Chandradeo Singh (respondent No. 4), and a writ of mandamus commanding on the respondents to renew the cinema licence of the aforesaid Shrikrishna Talkies, Samastipur in the name of the petitioner.

(2.) It may be stated here that the petitioner's husband Shri Surajdeo Singh started the aforesaid cinema business sometime in the year 1958 in a Hall (building) belonging to the Bengali Hindu Theatrical Club, Samastipur, which was taken on rent by him. It is not disputed that said Shri Surajdeo Singh was exhibiting the cinema in the said Hall under an appropriate licence granted by the licensing authority. The petitioner, who is the wife of said Surajdeo Singh, as already stated above, claims the said cinema business with all it appliances on the basis of a document executed by her husband in favour of the petitioner. It is said that since the date of transfer, the petitioner is running the cinema business in her own right. The petitioner's further claim is that all the appliances, furnitures and projectors etc., were sold by the petitioner's husband on payment of price for which a stamped receipt was granted to the petitioner by her husband on 2-2-1978. A copy of the transfer deed and the receipt have been made Annexures 3 and 4 respectively of this writ application. According to the petitioner, after the aforesaid transfer of the cinema business by her husband in her favour, her husband informed several authorities in writing about the aforesaid transfer. She has claimed to have made payment of ail taxes relating to the cinema business including the income-tax, sales tax and entertainment tax. In proof of these facts, the petitioner has annexed copies of various documents as annexures. A copy of the affidavit sworn by the petitioner's husband for presenting it before the Superintendent of Commercial Taxes, Samastipur, dated the 30th Dec., 1978 has been quoted in full in para 11 of the writ application. The purport of the said affidavit sworn by the petitioner's husband is that he has sold the Motion Pictures Exhibiting Old Projectors including all appliances, furniture etc., located in Shri Krishna Talkies, Samastipur to the petitioner for a sum of Rs. 10,000/-, and the said price was received by him in cash for which a receipt was granted on 2-2-1978. He has also admitted in that affidavit that he has already transferred his ownership in the aforesaid cinema business to his wife for all purposes with its all belongings. It has also been stated therein that the contents of the petition sent by the petitioner's husband to the Superintendent of Commercial Taxes for amendment of the registration (a copy of which is Annexure 5) are true to the best of the deponent's knowledge and belief. Annexure 6 dated 30th Dec., 1978 is a copy of the letter purported to be written by the petitioner's husband to the District Magistrate, Samastipur for substitution of the name of his wife in his place as licensee of the cinema business of M/s. Krishna Talkies, Samastipur and in it a prayer was made to renew the licence in her name. The petitioner has also claimed that in Jan., 1979, the cinema show was stopped as the dues of the District Board, Samastipur was not paid, and, accordingly, the petitioner arranged for payment of the dues of the District Board in instalments and made part payment of the dues by two cheques. Thereafter, according to the petitioner, the Magistrate in charge Cinema of Samastipur (respondent No. 3) allowed the petitioner to run the cinema from 3rd Feb., 1979. A true copy of the aforesaid letter has been annexed as Annexure 8 to the writ application. The petitioner also claims to have obtained clearance certificate from the Sales Tax Department in her name which was required for renewal of the cinema licence, a copy of which is Annexure 9. The petitioner also claims to have deposited renewal fee of the cinema licence for the year 1980 amounting to Rs. 1,400/-in the Treasury through Chalan in her own name and also made an application for renewal of the cinema licence. A copy of the treasury chalan is Annexure 10 and a copy of the application for renewal of the cinema licence is Annexure 11 to the writ application.

(3.) The matter was dealt with by the District Magistrate, Samastipur (respondent No. 2), who after examining and perusing all relevant papers was satisfied that the renewal of the cinema licence be made in favour of the petitioner. This is to be found in the recommendation of the District Magistrate as contained in Annexure-12 sent to the State Government dated 18th March', 1980. On receipt of the said recommendation, the Stale Government (in the Urban Development and Housing Department) wrote to the District Magistrate, Samastipur, that the renewal of the permanent licence from 1-1-1980 to 31-12-1982 (i.e. for three years) of Shrikrishna Talkies, Samastipur, is being granted on the condition that the licence for the year 1980 is being renewed whereas for the years 1981 and 1982 it would be done after examination of the relevant papers. A direction was also issued to the District Magistrate that he would examine all the relevant papers, take opinion of the Government Pleader and thereafter send the matter to the Government for consideration as to whether the licence will be issued in the name of the petitioner or not. A copy of the aforesaid Government letter dated 9th April, 1980 has been annexed as Annexure-13 to the writ application. After Annexure-13 was received by the District Magistrate, he examined the matter, took opinion of the Government Pleader, Samastipur and sent his recommendation to the Government (Urban Development and Housing Department) on the 16th June, 1980 recommending renewal of the licence in favour of the petitioner. Annexure-14 is the true copy of the said letter and Annexure-15 is the true copy of the opinion of the Government Pleader, Samastipur. However, the State Government (Urban Development and Housing Department) did not choose to pass order in consonance with the District Magistrate's recommendation, but took opinion from the then Advocate General, Bihar and ultimately by order dated 28th Nov., 1980 directed renewal of the licence in the name of Chandradeo Singh (respondent No. 4), who is the son of Suraj-deo Singh and step son of the petitioner. The petitioner has, therefore, moved this writ application for the aforesaid reliefs.