N KAILASAM Vs. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT TO TAMIL NADU CINEMA FORT ST GEORGE MADRAS 9

JUDGEMENT

(1.) GOKULAKRISHNAN, O.CJ. - The Petitioner in W.P. No. 5153 of 1980 is the appellant herein. The appellant filed the writ petition for quashing the order passed by the first respondent herein in G.O. Rt. No. 2714 Home (Cinemas) Department, dated 19th July, 1980. The short facts of the case are as follows: - The third respondent herein applied for a no-objection certificate to put up a semi-permanent theatre in Viralimalai. On 29th March, 1975, the Collector of Pudukottai granted a no-objection certificate to the third respondent. As provided. for in the no-objection certificate, the third respondent ought to have completed the construction of the semi-permanent theatre in the site for which the no-objection certificate was given, on or before 29th March, 1978. The third respondent did not complete the construction within that time and he applied to the first respondent for extension of time. On 14th December, 1977, the appellant herein applied to the Collector for grant of a no-objection certificate to put up a permanent theatre in the survey number referred to by him. The appellant has also filed objections before the Government that the third respondent herein should not be given any extension of time and that the State Government has no power to accord such extension. However, the first respondent, by G.O. 2770, Home (Cinemas) Department, dated 27th July, 1978, exercising powers under section 11 of the Tamil Nadu Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to in this judgment as the Act) extended the period by two years and directed the third respondent to complete the construction by 28th March, 1980. Questioning this grant of extension given by the first respondent the appellant herein filed W.P. No. 4891 of 1979, stating that section 11 of the Act does not empower the State Government to extend the time. The said writ petition is pending. In the said writ petition, interim stay was granted on 18th December, 1978, but the same was vacated on 5th February, 1979. Even though the third respondent was given time upto 28th March, 1980 by G.O. Rt. No. 2770. Home (Cinemas) Department dated 25th July, 1978, the third respondent was not able to complete the construction due to various difficulties such as obtaining iron and cement permits. Hence the third respondent again prayed for extension of time. Even at this time, the appellant filed objections stating that the State Government has no power to grant extension under section 11 of the Act. Not content with that, the appellant also filed W.P. No. 3110 of 1980. for a writ of prohibition prohibiting the first respondent from in any manner considering the application of the third respondent seeking extension of time granted in the no-objection certificate dated 23rd March, 1975, issued by the second respondent.

(2.) MOHAN, J., after observing that the petition filed by the appellant herein before the Government objecting to the prayer for the grant of time to the third respondent will be considered on its merits and suitable orders will be passed as expeditiously as possible, dismissed the writ petition at the admission stage itself.

(3.) MOHAN, J., after observing that nowhere the prior order contemplates hearing of the appellant, that it is entirely in the discretion of the Government to grant extension under section 11 of the Act and that such extension cannot be questioned, dismissed the writ petition.