Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Himagiri A/C Dts vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 14 December, 2021
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
MAIN CASE No.: W.P. Nos. 27268, 27336 and 29635 of 2021
PROCEEDING SHEET
Sl. Office
DATE ORDER
No Note
1. 14.12.2021 CMR, J
Counter affidavit of respondent No.1 filed.
Post the matter for hearing after three (3)
weeks.
________
CMR, J
I.A.No.1 of 2021
By the impugned G.O.Ms.No.35, dated
08.04.2021, the Government has fixed rates for
admission into cinema theaters. The said rates for
admission into cinema theaters are mainly fixed on
the basis of regional classification. They have
classified the areas as Municipal Corporation,
Municipality, Nagar Panchayat and Gram Panchayat
and on the basis of the said regional classification,
rates for admission into cinema theaters have been
fixed.
The petitioners in these writ petitions
challenge the legal validity of the impugned G.O
primarily on three grounds. i.e., 1) The said fixing of
rates for admission into cinema theaters on the basis
of regional classification is contrary to the law laid
down by this Court in the judgment rendered in the
case of Thirumala Theatre, Khammam, Rep. by its
Partner and others V. Government of Andhra
Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home
Department & others reported in (2012) 6 ALT 326.
2) that the common High Court in W.P.No.18779 of
2013 and batch, while setting aside G.O.Ms.No.100
that was issued fixing the rates for admission into
cinema theaters, directed both the Governments of
the State of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana to
constitute a Committee to be headed by the Principal
Secretary for Home to fix the rates of admission into
the cinema theaters afresh and that the present
Committee for bringing the impugned G.O.Ms.No.35
was constituted contrary to the directions given by
the learned single Judge of the common High Court
and the Committee was not constituted in
accordance with the direction given in the said
judgment and as such the impugned G.O. is not
valid under law and
3) that fixing rates by the Government in the
impugned G.O for admission into the theaters is
arbitrary and it amounts to intrusion into the domain
of the petitioners' business, which is a private
business and it violates Article 19(1)(g) of the
Constitution of India.
Therefore, the validity of the impugned G.O. is
to be tested on the touchstone of the law laid down
and the direction given by the Erstwhile High Court
of Andhra Pradesh and the common High Court in
the aforesaid two judgments.
Earlier, when a similar G.O.Ms.No.181, dated
11.07.2011, was issued fixing the rates for admission
into cinema theaters on the basis of regional
classification, when the same was questioned before
the Erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the
above Thirumala Theatre, Khammam v. the State of
Andhra Pradesh case, this Court found fault with
such classification. At para No.22 of the judgment,
this Court clearly held that it is not open to fix rates
of admission merely on the basis of classification of
theaters into air-conditioned, air-cooled and others,
which are located in the areas of Municipal
Corporation and Municipalities etc. Therefore, as per
the law laid down in the aforesaid judgment, fixing
the rates of admission into cinema theaters in the
impugned G.O. prima facie seems to be bad under law
as the present rates are also fixed in the impugned
G.O. for admission into cinema theaters on the basis
of the same regional classification and other
classifications.
Learned Government Pleader for Home relied
on the judgment of the Apex Court rendered in the
case of DEEPAK THEATRE, DHURI v. STATE OF
PUNJAB [1992 Supp (1) SCC 684], wherein it is held
that the power of the Licensing authority to regulate
exhibiting movies includes the power to classify the
seats in the auditorium and fix the rates of admission
to the respective classes.
A perusal of the said judgment only shows
that the Licensing authority can classify the seats in
the auditorium and fix the rates for admission to the
respective classes. It is not a case where it is held
that regional classification can be made by making a
division of regions like Municipal Corporations,
Municipalities, Nagara Panchayats etc., and that the
rates can be fixed for admission to the theatres on the
basis of the said regional classification. Therefore,
this judgment would not nullify the ratio laid down
by this High Court in the case of THIRUMALA
THEATRE, KHAMMAM v. STATE OF ANDHRA
PRADESH, referred supra. Therefore, prima facie, the
present G.O. appears to have been vitiated on
account of the infirmity that is discussed above.
Similarly, when the Government brought into
existence another G.O.Ms.No.100 fixing the rates of
admission into cinema theaters and the same was
questioned before the High Court, learned single
Judge has set aside the said G.O. and directed the
Government to constitute a Committee headed by
Principal Secretary for Home leaving it open to him
to choose the exhibitors, distributors and other
members, who are the stakeholders in running the
said cinema theater business, to participate in the
Committee to adjudicate the issues involved in the
said batch of Writ Petitions. The present Committee
that was constituted for bringing into force of the
impugned G.O.Ms.No.35, was not constituted with
the Principal Secretary for Home as the head of the
said Committee. He was only made as a member of
the Committee and he was not head of the
Committee as directed by the High Court. Therefore,
the very constitution of the Committee is not in
accordance with the direction given by the learned
single Judge.
Therefore, in the said facts and circumstances
of the case, the petitioners could make out a strong
prima facie case warranting interference of this Court
to examine in the main Writ Petition whether the
impugned G.O.Ms.No.35 fixing the rates of
admission into cinema theaters on the basis of
regional classification and other classifications, is
legally sustainable or not in the main Writ Petition.
Also to ascertain whether constitution of the present
Committee is valid under law or not as it was
constituted contrary to the direction given by the
High Court in W.P.No.18779 of 2013 and batch.
Therefore, in the said facts and circumstances
of the case, the petitioners are permitted to run the
cinema theaters as per the rates prevailing prior to
passing of the impugned G.O. as per the procedure
that was in vogue hitherto. However, the said rates
of admission shall be fixed in consultation with the
Joint Collector, who is the licensing authority, after
giving prior intimation to him.
________
CMR, J
AKN
