- (1.) In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order as contained in memo No. 304 dated 4-5-2005 issued by the Commandant, Jharkhand Armed Police, Ranchi cancelling the business of the petitioner and allotting the same to respondent No. 3 and also for quashing the order as contained in letter No. 3565 dated 19-5-2005 directing the petitioner to pay the outstanding dues to respondent No. 3. These letters have been annexed as Annexures 6 and 8 to the writ petition.
(2.) The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass: the petitioner is the proprietor of A.A. Star Vision, Doranda and was registered as Cable operator by the Registering Authority for running cable television network. Registration was earlier granted for a period of one year which was, time to time, extended upto 2006. The petitioner has been running his cable business at BMP-1 premises, Doranda. Petitioner's case is that since the BMP-1 premises is a colony and, as such, in the year, 1989 itself it was decided that instead of collecting money from door to door the subscription amount will be detected from the salary of the consumers and the same will be paid to the petitioner in one lump sum. Petitioner's further case is that he entered into a partnership business with respondent No.3 for running cable business and he was never paid any amount from respondent No. 3. To the utter surprise of the petitioner he received the impugned order dated 4-5-2005 issued by the Commandant directing that the cable business will be run by respondent No. 3 without any partnership.
(3.) Respondent No. 2 has filed counter affidavit in which it is stated that the Commandant has full authority to supervise and decide upon the desirability of allowing persons of his choice inside the premises keeping in view the factors like discipline, obedience, integrity and the like. For the purpose of amenities and other entertainment for daily life of the residents of the area, it is the Commandant's pleasure to make such arrangement which is available to an ordinary citizen of the country and such amenities include the transmission of national programmes etc. Case of respondent No. 2 is that the matter relating to cable service within the premises of the Commandant a contractual relationship existed between the petitioner, respondent No.3 and respondent No.2 according to which payment of subscription money was to be made by the petitioner and, thereafter, to respondent No.3 who is the main operator of the area having licence/authority granted by various channels. So respondent No.3 made payment to the Channels.;