- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) PETITIONER claims to be licensee under U.P. Cinematograph Rules, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as 'Rules, 1951') in respect of a cinema hall namely Shree Palace, Maunath Bhanjan, District Mau. He has filed this writ petition for quashing the orders dated 18.7.2007 and dated 17.10.2008 as well as for a writ of mandamus commanding the State respondents to provide the facility of grant-in-aid as per the scheme notified under Government Order dated 21.7.1986. The facts in short relevant for deciding the present writ petition are as follows: Petitioner alongwith others is a partner of M/s. H.J. Enterprises and is carrying on the cinema business at Maunath Bhanjan, Mau under the name and style of Shree Palace. On 21st July, 1986 the State Government came out with a scheme (hereinafter referred to as '1986 Scheme') for the purposes of providing financial assistance for construction of permanent cinema halls provided the exhibitor satisfied the conditions mentioned in the said scheme. Motivated by the aforesaid scheme, the petitioner is stated to have filed an application on 18th November, 1988 under Rule 3(3) of the Rules, 1951 for permission being granted to construct a permanent cinema hall over Plot No. 248/249 situate in Mohalla Jahangirabad, Maunath Bhanjan, Oistrict-Mau. Under an order dated 23.1.1990 permission to construct the cinema building was refused by the District Magistrate in view of non-compliance of the statutory conditions.
(3.) NOT being satisfied with the order so passed, the petitioner made a representation before the Ministry of Finance, State of Uttar Pradesh. The representation remained pending. The petitioner simultaneously moved an application for grant of financial assistance for exhibiting the feature film, which also remained pending with the District Magistrate, Licensing Authority under the Rules, 1951. It was found that the petitioner had constructed and had run the cinema hall without obtaining the permission under Rule 3(3) of the Rules, 1951 from the concerned authority. The petitioner, therefore, made an application for exemption being granted and the offence being compounded. On the application of the writ petitioner, the State Government passed an order dated 25.4.1990 providing that compounding fee be deposited by the petitioner to the tune of Rs. 50,000/- and exemption be granted under sub-rule (3) of Rule 3 of the Rules, 1951 with a further specific condition that the petitioner shall not be entitled for any incentive under grant-in-aid scheme. For the same petitioner was required to furnish a written undertaking. The petitioner was directed to deposit the sum of Rs. 50,000/- as compounding fee alongwith an undertaking, noticed above, in the office of the District Magistrate.;