R M SESHADRI Vs. DIST MAGISTRATE TANJORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the owner of a permanent cinema theatre called Sri Brahannayaki in Tiruthuraipundi, Tanjore District, and held a licence from the District Magistrate, Tanjore, in respect of the same with effect from September 5, 1950 to September 4, 1951. The licence is granted for one year at a time and is renewable from year to year. He objected to certain conditions in the licence imposed by the District Magistrate, Tanjore, in pursuance of 2 notifications (G. O. Mis. 1054, Home, dated 28th March, 1948, and G. O. Mis 3422, dated 15th September, 1948) issued by the State of Madras purporting to act in exercise of powers conferred by Section 8 of the Cinematograph Act of 1918. The impugned conditions may conveniently be set out here:

(2.) The appellant moved the High Court of Judicature at Madras under Art. 226 of the Constitution for an order or direction to the District Magistrate, Tanjore, to delete the said conditions from his licence and to the State of Madras to rescind the notifications issued by it. His contention was that the conditions imposed by the said notifications are 'ultra virus' and beyond the powers of the licensing authority and that they are void inasmuch as they contravened his freedom of speech and expression under Art. 19(1) (a) and his right to carry on trade or business under Art. 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution. Both the contentions were rejected, the High Court holding that the conditions imposed were reasonable and were in the interest of the general public. The High Court granted leave to appeal to this Court.

(3.) The appellant who argued the appeal in person raised 2 main contentions. He argued firstly, that the notifications and conditions are beyond the competence of the Government of Madras and the District Magistrate, and secondly, that in any event the conditions do not, as being outside the scope of the Cinematograph Act amount to reasonable restrictions imposed in the interest of the general public.