Wednesday, 29, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

New Delhi General Majdoor Union ... vs Govt. Of India
1999 Latest Caselaw 374 Del

Citation : 1999 Latest Caselaw 374 Del
Judgement Date : 4 May, 1999

Delhi High Court
New Delhi General Majdoor Union ... vs Govt. Of India on 4 May, 1999
Equivalent citations: 2000 IAD Delhi 675
Bench: Acj, K Gupta

ORDER

CW No. 4963/98 & CMs. 11095/98 & 9894/98.

1. On 24th September, 1998 Petitioners-New Delhi General Mazdoor Union (Regd.) apprehending closure of the Grandlay Cinema being run by respondent No. 6 sought certain directions by filing this petition. It was prayed that direction be issued to respondents 4 and 5 to restrain respondent No. 6 from changing the land use of the leased land as the leased land had been granted only for the purpose of running a Cinema Hall and respondent No. 6 cannot be permitted to convert the leased land into commercial use. The petitioners also prayed that direction be issued to respondent No. 1 to enforce the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act by directing the respondents No. 1 to take over the management of respondent No. 6 so as to allow the petitioners to earn their livilihood.

2. On the last date of hearing we had observed that the petitioners, if they are aggrieved by closure of cinema rendering the workman without any job, they are at liberty to take steps in accordance with law for enforcement of their rights and to raise industrial dispute before the competent authority. We are also informed that the petitioners have already taken steps in that regard.

3. We have gone through the material placed on record as well as the latest affidavit of respondent No. 5 which is at Page No. 131 of the paperbook, which makes a reference to the letter dated 23rd February, 1993 of the Government of India conveying its decision to the Administration, NDMC, Commissioner MCD and others that Government of India, considering the problems faced by Motion Picture, Exhibitors regarding the economic viability of running cinema theatres, with reference to the provisions of the Master Plan has decided that the cinema theatres be allowed to convert the existing cinema theatres to commercial use as may be permissible under the relevant plans subject to course to the condition that at least 300 seats are retained for cinema theatre. The said letter clarified that the relaxation is subject to the provisions of applicable building bye-laws and further subject to the provisions of Delhi Cinematographic Act and rules framed thereunder. Direction was issued to the concerned authority that any plan submitted by the owners may be examined in the light of the said decision of Government of India.

4. Vide Perpetual Lease Deed dated 27th of January, 1986. Cinema plot admeasuring about 1672.26 sq. meters situated at Community Centre, Friends Colony, New Delhi was given unto M/s. Grandlay Electricals (India) for the purposes of construction of Cinema. 20% of the "total area" was permitted to be sold or transferred as commercial space. This condition of making the commercial floor space only to "maximum extent of 20% of the total area" was because of the conditions as informed by the Master Plan. Through Notification dated 25.10.1994, duly published in the Gazette on 26th of November, 1994, the words "up to 20% of the total floor area", after the words "commercial office" were deleted.

5. Pursuant to the orders passed in a writ petition filed by respondent No. 6 MCD was directed to release the building plans submitted by it. Plans were approved and on 19th August, 1998 orders were passed by Lt. Governor directing that licence to run cinema shall cease w.e.f. 1st October, 1998.

6. In view of these facts, we are not inclined to proceed with this petition as a 'public interest litigation' on behalf of workers union. Insofar as use of property is concerned, the same is in consonance with the terms of lease and in case there be any violation by respondent No. 6 it will be open to the lessor to take appropriate action in accordance with the law. We in exercise of our writ jurisdiction cannot, restrain respondent No. 6 from making use of the property and changing the land use of the leased land particularly when relaxation has been conveyed by the Government of India to the appropriate authority.

7. Dismissed.

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter