High Court · 2007

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 25.10.2007CORAMTHE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE PRABHA SRIDEVANW.P.No.32497 of 2004W.P.M.P.No.39369 of 2004 and W.V.M.P.No.1826 of 2006 Srenevassa Theatrerep. by its ProprietorR.Venkatanarayanan174, 5th North Street,Mariappa Nagar,Annamalai Nagar,Chidambaram. ... Petitioner Vs. The District Collector of CuddaloreCuddalore. ... Respondent Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,praying for a writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the recordscomprised in the proceedings of the respondent in hisNa.Ka.No.C1/44429/99, dated 29.10.2004 and quash the proceedings dated29.10.2004 and consequently direct the respondent herein to sanction thestructural modification of the petitioner theatre. For Petitioner : Mr.V.Ramajegadeesan For Respondent : Mr.K.Balakrishnan, AGP O R D E RBy consent, the main writ petition has been argued. The writpetitioner is a cinema theatre. It appears that it was not making profitand therefore, a portion of the theatre premises was carved out andshopping complex was put up on the western side. The petitioner statesthat an application was made to the respondent, who is the licensingauthority on 27.05.1999 for approval of the alteration. There was a delayin disposing of the said application. Therefore, a writ petition was filedin W.P.No.12652 of 2001 for consideration of the application. On10.03.2004, the above writ petition was disposed of with a direction tothe respondents to consider and pass orders. So far, the respondent hasnot passed orders. On 25.05.2004, the respondent served a notice on thepetitioner, directing the petitioner to explain why the car parkingfacility is not adequate, and also regarding the floor-space-index on thefour sides of the theatre and some suggestion was received with regard tothe placement of the ticket counter. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2. According to the petitioner, these suggestions were carried outand a revised plan was also submitted. Thereafter the respondent hasissued the impugned order on 29.10.2004 in Na.Ka.No.C1/44429/99, directingthe petitioner to demolish the ticket counter and to provide for necessarycar parking outside the theatre premises. Against that, this writ petitionhas been filed.3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, theTahsildar, Sub Collector and the Superintending Engineer, PWD have given afavourable report and yet the modifications in construction made by thepetitioner have not been sanctioned. According to the learned counsel forthe petitioner, the District Collector cannot depute other officials tofile a report, contrary to the earlier favourable reports.4. At the time of admission, interim stay was granted, only withregard to penal action and yet till date, the petitioner has not compliedwith the instruction given in the impugned order. The impugned order readsas follows :"rpjk;guk; tl;lk; rp/bfhj;j';Fo fpuhkj;jpy; ,a';fp tUk; rPdpthrhjpiuau';fpdpy; Kd; mDkjp bgwhky; tzpf tshfk; fl;oaijj;bjhlh;e;J ghh;iu 1y; fz;Ls;s fojj;jpy; tpsf;fk; nfhug;gl;lJ/jpiuau';F chpikahsh; tpsf;ff; fojj;jpid bgw;Wf; bfhz;L jdJtpsf;fj;jpid ghh;it 2y; fhQqk; fojj;jpy; bjhptpj;Js;shh;/ mjpy;jhd; jpiug;gl tpjpfis kPwtpy;iy vd;Wk;. mYtyfg; gjpntLfisrhpahf Ma;t[ bra;ahky; jdf;F tpsf;fk; nfhUk; nehl;; O!;bfhLf;fg;gl;Ls;sJ vd;Wk; vdnt mjid js;Sgo bra;a[k;gonfhhpa[s;shh;/2) jpiuau';F chpikahsiu neuoahf tprhuiz bra;a[k; bghUl;Lghh;it 3y; fhQqk; Fwpg;ghid tH';fgl;lJ/ jpiuau';F chpikahsh;31/05/2004 md;W khtl;l Ml;rpahplk; neuoahf M$uhfp jdJtpsf;fj;jpid bjhptpj;Js;shh;/ mjpy; jpiuau';F tshfj;jpy;thfd';fis kpft[k; rt[fhpakhf epWj;j ,aYk; vd;Wk;jpiuau';fpdpy; Rw;wp K:d;W g[wKk; (fpHf;F. bjw;F. tlf;F)Fiwe;jgl;rk; 6/10 kPl;lUk; mjpfkhf ,ilbtsp cs;sJ vd;Wk;nkw;F gFjpapy; 3/05 kPl;lUf;Fk; mjpfkhf ,ilbtsp cs;sJ vd;Wk;bjhptpj;jhh;/3/ flY}h; bghJg;gzpj;Jiw braw;bghwpahsh; foj vz; 332-vk;-2004,ept-3-nfh-595 ehs; 06/07?2004 njjp fojj;jpy; nkw;gojpiuau';fpd; K:d;W gFjpfspYk; Fiwe;jgl;r njitahd 6/10kPl;lh; ,ltrjp ,y;iy vd;W bjhptpj;Js;shh;/4/ nkw;go jpiuau';F khtl;l Ml;rpauhy; g[yg;ghh;it bra;ag;gl;lJ/jpiuau';fpd; Kd;gFjpapy; cs;s fhypaplk; thfd';fid epWj;jnghJkhdJ my;y/ vdnt mnj eiyapy; jpiuau';fpid bjhlh;e;Jelj;jpl tpjp Kiefspy; tHp ,y;iy/ nkYk; jpiuau';fpd; bjw;FgFjpapy; cs;s of;fl; ft[z;liu ,lj;J vLg;gjd; K:yk; https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ jpiuau';fpd; K:d;W gFjpfspYk; 3/05 kPl;lh; ,ilbtsp fpilf;Fk;/5/ vdnt nkw;go fhuz';fspdhy; jpiuau';F chpikahsh;jpiuau';fpd; bjw;F gFjpapy; cs;s of;fl; ft[z;liu ,oj;J mg;g[wg;gLj;Jtjd; K:yk; me;j gFjpapy; 3/05 kPl;lh; ,ilbtspfpilf;Fk;/ ,J jtpu thfd';fis epWj;Jtjw;F jpiuau';fpw;Fbtspna jdpahf Tljy; ,lj;jpid bgw;W mjw;fhd Mtz';fidjpiuau';fpw;F btspna jdpahf TLjy; ,lj;jpid bgw;W mjw;fhdMtz';fis 10/11/2004f;Fs; xg;gilf;f ntz;Lk;/ jpiuau';Fchpikahsh; 10/11/2004 f;Fs; TLjy; thfd epWj;Jkplk; jpiuau';fpw;Fbtspapy; Vw;ghL bra;J tpl;L mjd; tpguj;jpid fhz;gpf;fntz;Lk; vd;W bjhptpf;fg;gLfpwJ/ jtwpdhy; jkpH;ehL rpdpkh(xG';FKiw) tpjpfspd;go chpa jz;lid eltof;if vLf;fg;gLk; vd,Wjpahf bjhptpf;fg;gLfpwJ/"5. A detailed counter along with the reports has been filed. It isseen from that the Director of Town Planning had turned down theapplication of the petitioner for modification on the following grounds :a) Rule 53 (1) of T.N.C.(R) Rules, 1975 not satisfied, as 6.1 metresopen space has not been provided in 3 sides.b) Vehicle parking space not providedc) Public buildings Rules 9, 12 and 13 satisfied.and therefore, the former Collector, Cuddalore had inspected the theatreon 29.09.1998 and rejected the petitioner’s application. Thereafter, heagain applied for permission on 24.06.1999 to exclude certain extent. Inthis regard, Rule 53(1) of T.N.C.(R) Rules, 1957 is relevant, which readsas follows :Rule 53(1) of T.N.C.(R) Rules, 1957 says.The building shall be provided on atleast three of itssides with an open space of not less than 6.10 metresin width or such greater width as may be required bylicensing authority for parking the number of carswhich would be normally attracted and for the purposeof the free movement of persons and for facilitatingrescue operations in time of emergency. Provided thatin the case of a building where the licensee hasprovided adequate parking space for cars either in thebasement or ground floor over which the auditorium islocated, or in the vicinity of the building,acceptable to the licensing authority, there shall bean open space of not less than 3.05 metres on allsides of the building except on the rear side, for thefree movement of persons and to facilitate rescueoperations in times of emergency.6. This open space on three sides is necessary for free movement ofthe theater goers and to facilitate rescue operation in times ofemergency. The licensee shall provide adequate parking space in thebasement of the ground floor or in the vicinity in the building. After https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ scrutinizing the proposal submitted by the licensee, the SuperintendingEngineer, PWD had reported that the open space available, afteralteration would be adequate if the proposed modification satisfy therules. The detailed report of the Superintending Engineer is alsoavailable. It is in these circumstances that the Assistant Director ofSurvey and Land Regulations was instructed to inspect the theatrepremises. The report of the said officer reads as follows :The theatre premises has been surveyed as per the plancountersigned by the Superintending Engineer, PlanningDesigns and Circle, Chennai. There is some variation inmeasurement in the Northern side. In this side, thelicensee encroached in Road poramboke by way of cementplatform about 1.9 metre breadth of area .The remainingmeasurements in the plan have agree with the actualmeasurement.In the western side of the premises, the measurementsrelating to the area proposed to be separated from theoriginally approved plan of 563.21 Sq.metres are foundto be correct. Further, in the western side, themeasurement 3.20 metres as per plan agrees with theactual measurement.7. The then Collector, inspected the theatre on 04.09.2001 anddirected the Executive Engineer (PWD) Buildings and Assistant Director(Survey & Land Records) to examine the proposal of the petitioner. TheAssistant Collector, Chidambaram, who was also requested to inspect thetheatre has sent his report, in his Office Ref.K.Dis.A3/5783/03, dated09.12.2003, after inspecting the theatre on 28.10.2003 as follows:The total area having existing carpet area of theatreis 2400 sq.metres (including shopping complex andthreatre built area). The shopping complex were nowconstructed in the area of 345 sq.metre, consistingnine shops which were functioning. The licensee has notobtained prior permission from the licensing authorityfor the construction of shopping complex. On the south-west side of the backyard of the theatre,the licensee had constructed a new generator roomwithout obtaining prior permission from the licensingauthority. In this place also, he has sold the land fora shopping complex without getting prior approval.Hence, 6.10 metre or more breadth on the three sidesare not available for movement of traffic flow, carparking, two wheeler, cycle parking as per rules laiddown in 53(1) of Tamil Nadu Cinemas (Regularion) Rules,1957.The licensee has evicted the encroachments by means ofsome permanent construction and fencing in Governmentporomboke on the east west direction.The licensee has deleted certain area (in 345 Sq.metre)in the western side of the theatre premises and https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ constructed the shopping complex and also makingcertain alterations in structures in the existingtheatre. Hence, there is no sufficient space availableas per Rule 53(1) of TNC (R) Rules, 1957. Therefore, hehas recommended that necessary action may be takenagainst the licensee Srinivasa Theatre, Chidambaram."8. The District Revenue Officer, Cuddalore has inspected the theatreand his report reads as follows :“The theatre is situated in Survey No.154 of C.Konthankudi village. The Gap between the compound wallof the theatre and the building wall of the theatre onthe western side is 3.2, 5.6, 3.3, 3.2 meters etc indifference places. Without obtaining prior permissionof the licensing authority (i.e.) District other sideof the area has been converted as shopping complex.The intervening area is very narrow and if an accidenttakes place in the theatre, the main members wouldsuddenly rush through this area for rescue. Since thearea is very narrow, there is likelihood of stampedeand chances are more for casualties. The front areai.e. northern side of the theatre, vacani spacemeasurement is 9.8 metre only. The old cycle standthat has been placed earlier in the western side area,now has been shifted to the Portico of the theatre.During the time of inspection, it was happened to seethat more number of cycles were standing before theportico just close to the step of the theatre. Carparking, two wheeler parking, cycle parking etc. haveto be placed before the portico area and in point ofview this will cause inconvenience to the film viewers.Therefore, for the irregularities as mentioned above,it is not advisable to approve the alignment in thewestern direction of the theatre area. The licenseemay be issued A SHOW CAUSE NOTICE for havingconstructed the shopping complex without permission ofthe licensing authority and thereby causedinconvenience to the Film viewers and thereafter actionmay be taken against the licensee as per Rules andregulations.”9. Based on the inspection notice of the District Revenue Officer,show cause notice was issued to the petitioner. He submitted hisexplanation at that time, that he had filed a writ petition for a mandamusto the District Collector to pass orders on his application, dated27.05.1999. 10. According to the respondent, the petitioner had violated therules under the Tamil Nadu Cinemas (Regulation) Rules, 1957, (1) byconverting the are at the western side of the wall as chopping complexwithout obtaining prior permission (Rule 77 of the said Rule). (2) By notproviding sufficient space for parking facility (Rule 53(1) of the saidRule) and (3) Construction of new generator room on the south west side of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the backyard of the theatre without obtaining prior permission (Rule 77 ofthe said Rule). It is in these circumstances, show cause notice was issuedfor the three violation. 11. According to the respondent, it is not correct that therespondent had ignored the favourable report submitted by the otherofficers. According to the respondent, all the officers had sent theirremarks stating to what extent the petitioner’s request could beconsidered by making suitable arrangement of the existing structure. Theearlier report have also been enclosed along with the counter and it isseen from that it is not correct to say that the Superintending Engineerhas given a favourable report. It has been ignored by the presentCollector, because the report itself states that the side open spaces havebeen scrutnised, based on the measurements furnished by the licensee andit is subject to the correctness of the said measurement and it is alsoclear from the said report that after the modifications are made by thepetitioner, inspection should be done to see if the modifications havebeen carried out in accordance with the rules. The general guidelines forfollowing during the construction of the proposed modification works wasenclosed as an annexure. 12. The Assistant Director (Survey and Records) has also filed hisreport. The notes of the inspection of the then Collector, Cuddalore on04.09.2001 reads as follows:"During my inspection, I find that the parking of motorvehicles behind the theatre premises, there is noadequate space available. On the south west side ofthe backyard of the theatre, the licencee hasconstructed a new generator room violating theindication shown in the map. As per plan submittedthis generator room has to be constructed on the southeast portion. This deviation has been noticed duringmy inspection and the licencee has not obtained priorpermission.The Licencee ‘s request has been previously rejected bythe licensing authorities as per rule 53(1) of TNC( R)Rules as the licencee has not satisfied the rules. Thelicencee has proposed to remove the existing toilets onthe southern side and to construct the same adjacent tothe existing building backyard of the cinema house.Parking slot seems to be inadequate.E.E. (PWD), Buildings, Assistant Director (Survey &Land Records) should examine the matter and theavailability of space for car parking and twowheelers / cycles parking and send me a report over thespace in question to decide the issue early. The licencee has also encroached upon some space inGovernment poramboke on east west direction by means ofsome permanent construction and fencing. Theencroachments have to be removed." https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

13. The inspection report of the Assistant Collector, Chidambaramhas also been enclosed and it is seen from that, the Inspection is done inthe presence of the Manager of the theatre and it reads as follows :"At the time of inspection of the Srinivasa Theatre,Chidambaram the Manager of the Theatre was present. The total area having existing carpet area of theatreis 2400 sq. metre., (including shopping complex andtheatre built area) The shopping complex were nowconstructed in the area of 345 Sq.metre., consistingnine shops were functioning. The Licence has notobtained prior permission from the Licensing authorityfor the construction of shopping complex.On the south west side of the backyard of the theatrethe licensee has constructed a new generator roomwithout obtained prior permission from the Licensingauthority. In this place also he has sold the landfor approval. Hence there is a 6.10 metre., or morebreath on the three sides are not available formovement of traffic flow, car parking, two wheeler,cycle parking as per rules laid down in 53(1) of TamilNadu Cinema (Regulation) Rules 1957.The Licensee have evicted the encroachment by means ofsome permanent construction and fencing in Governmentporamboke on the west direction on the points noticedby the former Collector’s inspection dated 04.09.2001.The Licensee had made deleted certain area in 345sq.metre., the western side of the theatre premisesand constructed the structures in the existingtheartre. Hence there is no sufficient spaceavailable as per Rule 53(1) of TNC( R) Rules 1957.Therefore I request that necessary action may be thenagainst the licence, Srinivasa Theatre, Chidambaram.I enclose the notes of my inspection and sketchshowing the vacant site. Commercial complex andCinema theatre presently built up area." https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

14. It is in these circumstances that the impugned order has beenissued. The authorities are bound in duty to ensure that the safetyregulations with regard to construction of theatre are not violated by thetheatre owners. It is on account of unscrupulous violation and disregardof the statutory rules that tragic accidents occur in theatre, and evenin an emergency the cinema goers are unable to be evacuated safety. Inthis background, if the respondent wants to ensure that the petitionertheatre premises shall adhere to the regulations, this Court will not andcannot interfere. All the reports enclosed along with the counter wouldshow that the inspection has been done meticulously by various officersand it is thereafter the impugned order has been passed. I see no reasonto interfere. This writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently,connected W.P.M.P.No.39368 of 2004 and W.V.M.P.No.1826 of 2006 is alsodismissed.Sd/Asst.Registrar/true copy/Sub Asst.RegistrartsvnToThe District Collector of CuddaloreCuddalore. 1 cc To Mr.V.Ramajegadeesan, Advocate, SR.64605.1 cc To The Government Pleader, SR.64349.W.P.No.32497 of 2004 LA(CO)RVL 21.11.2007