Sree Balaji Theatres v. The State of Tamil Nadu

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 2-4-2008CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMARW.P.No.4847 of 2008M.P.No.1 of 2008Sree Balaji Theatres,rep.by its Managing Director,Thirukoilur...PetitionerVs.1.The State of Tamil Nadu,rep.by its Secretary to Government,(Home) Cinema Department,Fort St.George,Chennai - 600 009.2.The Additional Commissioner,Cinemas, Land Administration Department,Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.3.The District Collector,Villupuram,Villupuram District....RespondentsPrayer:This writ petition is filed under Article 226 ofConstitution of India, praying this Court to issue a writ ofCertiorari calling for the records of the proceedings of the firstrespondent dated 29.1.2008 made in G.O.(D)No.75 Home (Cinema)Department, issued pursuant to proceedings of the second respondentdated 6.7.2007 made in L3/CA No.12/2007 and the proceedings of thethird respondent made in Na.Ka.C2/12397/07 dated 7.5.2007 and quashthe same. For Petitioner:Mr.S.ThirumavalavanFor Respondents:Mr.M.R.Jothimanian,Government Advocate https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ O R D E RBy consent of both parties, the writ petition is taken up forfinal disposal.2.Prayer in the writ petition is to quash the order of theGovernment dated 29.1.2008 modifying the suspension of 'C' Formlicence of the petitioner theatre for ten days.3.The petitioner theatre is issued with 'C' Form licence underthe provisions of the Tamil Nadu Cinema Regulation Act and Rules madethereunder and it is a permanent theatre, which is exhibiting mainlyTamil movies. On 17.3.2007, a new picture named 'Sabari' wasexhibited during the morning show. The Revenue Divisional Officer,Tirukoilur, inspected the theatre and submitted a report to the thirdrespondent. Based on the inspection report, the third respondentissued a show cause notice on 23.3.2007 alleging two charges,(i) The Licensee collected higher rate for admission i.e,Rs.10/- instead of Rs.5.75 and Rs.20/- instead ofRs.7.75 and as such violated condition No.6 of the 'C'Form licence;(ii)The Licensee violated the proceedings of the thirdrespondent dated 20.9.1996 wherein the third respondentfixed the rate of admission of inmates to thepetitioner theatre.Petitioner submitted its explanation by stating that the entiretickets for the morning show intended for 17.3.2007 were sold to theFans' Association as they have made bulk booking and no higher ratemore than the rate fixed in the 'C' form licence was collected. Itis further stated that the members of the Fans' Association sold thetickets at higher rate for collecting contribution to theirAssociation and the petitioner cannot be blamed for the same, as theselling had taken place outside the licenced premises. According tothe petitioner, the third respondent without considering the saidexplanation passed an order on 7.5.2007 suspending the 'C' Formlicence of the petitioner theatre for a period of 15 days, as againstwhich the petitioner filed an appeal before the second respondent inwhich the period of suspension was reduced from 15 days to 10 days.Against the said order in appeal, the petitioner filed revisionbefore the first respondent on 12.7.2007. The said revision wasdismissed by the first respondent and confirmed the order of thesecond respondent, as against which this writ petition is filed onthe ground that principles of natural justice was not followed by the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Licensing Authority while imposing the punishment of suspension oflicence and copies of the statement obtained from the audiance andthe report of the Revenue Divisional Officer were not furnishedbefore imposing the punishment.4.This Court admitted the writ petition on 25.2.2008 andgranted interim stay for a period of four weeks. When the matter wasposted for extending the interim stay, the learned counsel for thepetitioner theatre submitted that out of ten days of suspensionimposed, petitioner theatre was closed for one day and instead ofclosing the theatre for nine days to undergo the punishment, thepetitioner is willing to pay the profit of the petitioner theatre fornine days to any welfare organisation/charitable institution and theamount may be fixed by this Court and suitable direction may be givento the petitioner so that the petitioner theatre need not be closed.An affidavit dated 28.3.2008 containing the said statement is alsofiled by the petitioner on 31.3.2008. 5.The learned Government Advocate appearing for therespondents submitted that the suggestion made by the learned counselfor the petitioner and in view of the affidavit filed in respect ofthe same may be accepted by this Court and suitable direction may begiven to the petitioner to pay the profits to be earned by thepetitioner theatre for nine days, to any Charitable institution.6.I have considered the rival submissions of the learnedcounsel appearing for the petitioner as well as respondents.7.The point in issue is whether the submission made by thelearned counsel for the petitioner can be accepted and by seekingorders on that basis, the petitioner can avoid the punishment imposed.8.It is an admitted fact that by screening films in a Theatrethe Licensee will earn income, as running a Cinema Theatre is atrade/business. By not allowing the Licensee/owner to takeaway/enjoy the profit derived by screening films for nine days, thepunishment imposed may not be said to be diluted. On the other hand,by permitting the petitioner to screen films and donate the profitsto Charity, it would only be beneficial to the Society as it serves anoble purpose. The petitioner also may not suffer loss of reputationand the Licensee/owner may not suffer by paying salary to hisemployees from his own source for nine days. If the suspension orderis implemented in its strict sense, the petitioner can state that thetheatre is closed for nine days for carrying out maintenance work andby allowing the same to take place, it will serve no purpose, exceptdenial of profit to the owner for nine days. In short, though thepetitioner is permitted to screen film for nine days, he will earnnothing. Hence I am of the view that interest of justice would bemet by accepting the suggestion put forward by the learned counsel https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ for the petitioner, which is also accepted by the learned counsel forthe respondents. 9.In the affidavit dated 28.3.2008 it is stated that thepetitioner theatre has 66 seats in the Box class; 191 seats each in1st and 2nd classes' 135 seats in the 3rd class; thus the totalseating capacity of the theatre is 583; and the gross collection isRs.3,545/- per show. In the affidavit, it is further stated asfollows:"I further submit that as a licensee of thetheatre, I undertake to pay the licensee's shareof profits for the period fixed by this Hon'bleCourt to any Welfare Organization/charitableinstitution as ordered by this Hon'ble Court. Iam willing to abide by whatever conditions imposedby this Hon'ble Court."10.In view of the above submission in the affidavit, it is tobe ascertained as to what would be the approximate profit of thetheatre for nine days by screening four shows per day. As per thedetails furnished by the petitioner theatre, it is evident that perday collection of the theatre would be Rs.14,180/- (Rs.3,545 x 4shows). I am of the considered view that the profit per day would beRs.4,000/- after deducting all expenses for maintaining the theatreand after payment of salary to the workers, etc., the approximateprofit for nine days works out to Rs.36,000/- and the said amount maybe ordered to be paid to the blind people, who could not see thebeauty of the nature and cinema, which is man-made creation.11.In the above circumstances, the writ petition is disposed ofwith the following directions:(a)As agreed by the petitioner, a sum of Rs.25,000/- (RupeesTwenty Five Thousand only) is ordered to be paid to C.S.I. BlindSchool, Irenipuram, Kanyakumari District, PINCODE-629197, where 105blind students are admitted and getting education, food and shelter,etc., free of cost.(b)The balance amount of Rs.11,000/- (Rupees Eleven Thousandonly) is ordered to be paid to Nethrodaya Trust, No.8 Spartan Nagar,Mogappair East, Chennai-600037, which has admitted 35 blind students,who are getting education, food, shelter, etc., free of cost.(c)The said amounts are to be paid to the above Schools for thevisually challenged, within two weeks from the date of receipt ofcopy of this order and compliance report with receipts issued by theconcerned Institutions shall be filed before this Court on or before22.4.2008. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ (d)Office is directed to post this matter before Court on23.4.2008 for reporting compliance of payment and on compliance, theperiod of suspension of licence is deemed to be complied with by thepetitioner.(e)Office is also directed to send copy of this order toC.S.I.School for Blind, Irenipuram, Kanyakumari District, PIN-629197,and Nethrodaya Trust, No.8 Spartan Nagar, Mogappair East, Chennai-37.(f) There will be no order as to costs. Connected miscellaneouspetition is closed.Sd/-Asst. Registrar./true copy/Sub Asst. Registrar.vrTo1.The Secretary to Government, (Home) Cinema Department,Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.2.The Additional Commissioner,Cinemas, Land Administration Department,Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.3.The District Collector,Villupuram, Villupuram District.4.The Correspondent, C.S.I.School for Blind,Irenipuram, Kanyakumari District, PIN-629 1975.The Founder, Nethrodaya Trust,No.8 Spartan Nagar, Mogappair East,Chennai - 600 037.6. The Section Officer Writ Section High Court Madras.+ 1 CC to Mr.S.Thirumavalavan Advocate SR NO.18456 Order in W.P.No.4847 of 2008VR(CO)JJM(02.04.08)