JUSTICE v. NARASINGH Order No. ORDER
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.3635 of 2025 M/s. PSR Cinemas …. Petitioner Mr. S.R. Mohanty, Advocate -versus- 1.Collector & District Magistrate, Ganjam 2.Addl. District Magistrate 3.Siddha Bhairabi Estate Pvt. Ltd. …. Opposite Parties Mr. S.N.Das, Advocate Mr. B.P. Tripathy, Sr. Advocate (O.P-3) CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH Order No.
Decision
ORDER 23.09.2025 10. 1. Heard Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for the Petitioner, Mr. Das, learned counsel for the State and Mr. Tripathy, learned Senior Advocate for the Opposite Party No.3. 2. The present Writ Petition has been filed initially assailing the order dated 27.12.2024 passed by the Collector & District Magistrate, Ganjam, vide Annexure-9, directing revocation of Cinema Licenses in favour of the Petitioner. Page 1 of 8 3. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the Petitioner, Mr. Mohanty that on a bare reading of the said Annexure-9, it is evident that the revocation of the cinema license has been done for non- submission of necessary documents within the time stipulated in terms of Rule 9(1)(a) and 9(2) of the Odisha Cinemas (Regulation) Rules, 1964. 4. It is the further submission of the learned counsel for the Petitioner, Mr. Mohanty that power to revoke the licence is envisaged under Rule 8 of the Odisha Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1954. For brevity, the said Rule 8 of the Odisha Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1954 is extracted hereunder: “8. Power to revoke licence - Where the holder of a licence has been convicted of an offence under section 7 of the Cinematograph Act, 1952 (XXXVI of 1952) or under Section 7 of this Act the licence may be revoked by the licensing authority.” 5. Referring to the same, it is submitted that the condition precedent for invoking the power under the said Rule 8 is conviction of the holder of the licence in an offence under Section 7 of the Cinematography Act, 1952. 6. Asserting that since the power of revocation has been exercised contrary to the schematic Page 2 of 8 arrangement of the Act and the Regulation, the same is liable to be set aside. 7. Counter affidavit has been filed by the State as well as Opposite Party No.3, inter alia, indicating that since there is no irregularity in the order so passed, no interference is called for by this Court. 8. During the pendency of the present writ petition, Opposite Party No.3 moved this Court by filing WP(C) No.10315 of 2025 praying for consideration of their representation for grant of license by referring to Annexures 1 and 3 to the said writ petition. For convenience of reference, the said Annexures 1 & 3 are culled out below: Page 3 of 8 9. This Court by order dated 22.04.2025 in WP(C) No.10315 of 2025 directed the Opposite Party No.1 therein, Collector & District Magistrate, Ganjam to take a decision on grant of license/permission to run the cinema hall within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the said order. Thereafter, the present Opposite Party No.3 sought to Page 4 of 8 intervene in WP(C) No.10315 of 2025 and seek recall of the order dated 22.04.2025. By order dated 13.08.2025, this Court was not inclined to recall the order dated 22.04.2025 passed in WP(C) No.10315 of 2025 while granting liberty to the Intervener therein to seek appropriate relief in the present Writ Petition. 10. In terms of such liberty granted to the Petitioner, it filed an application for amendment of the writ petition which was allowed by order dated 20.09.2025 and the consolidated writ petition has been filed and the copy thereof has been served on the learned counsel for the State as well as Opposite Party No.3. 11. In the consolidated writ petition, the following prayer has been made: “….. this Hon’ble Court may be graciously pleased to admit the writ application and after hearing the parties be pleased to quash letter dated 27.12.2024 as under Annexure-9. And; be further pleased to direct the Opp. Parties to direct the Opp. Parties to renew the Petitioner forthwith; license of the And be further pleased to quash the temporary license dated 26.06.2025 as under Annexure-10 and to direct the Opp. Party No.3 not to cause interference in the running of the Petitioner. xxx the cinema hall by xxx xxx” Page 5 of 8 It is apt to note that Annexure-10 which is sought to be set aside is the order passed by the Collector & District Magistrate, Ganjam dated 26.06.2025 granting temporary license to the Opposite Party No.3. 12. It is also brought to the notice of this Court by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Opposite Party No.3, Mr. Tripathy that in the meanwhile by order No.2814 dated 8.8.2025, the office order dated 26.06.2025 impugned herein as Annexure-10 has been kept in abeyance by the Collector & District Magistrate, Ganjam since the present writ petition is pending. 13. As noted above, impugned order at Annexure-9 was passed purportedly in exercise of the power as per Regulation 8 of the Odisha Cinemas (Regulation) Rules, 1964. But on a bare reading of Regulation 8 of said Regulation 1964 it is evident that the same can be invoked only on account of conviction for an offence under Section 7 of the Cinematograph Act, 1952. Since evidently the reason for revocation as envisaged under the said Regulation which is the condition precedent for exercise of such power being non-existent, the impugned order vide Annexure-9 being ex facie de hors the Regulation is set aside. Page 6 of 8 14. So far as Annexure-10 is concerned, on consideration of the rival submissions, this Court is of the considered view that in the light of setting aside of Annexure-9 as above, it would be prudent on the part of the Collector & District Magistrate, Ganjam to hear the Petitioner as well as the Opposite Party No.3 before any action is taken relating to the prayer of the Opposite Party No.3 regarding issuance of license. 15. Hence, by balancing equity inter se between the Parties, Annexure-10 which has been passed during pendency of the writ petition, which is also assailed is set aside. 16. Both the Petitioner as well as Opposite Party No.3 shall appear before the Opposite Party No.1- Collector & District Magistrate, Ganjam on 27.09.2025. The said Opposite Party shall consider the prayer of the Petitioner for renewal of license, as well as the prayer of the Opposite Party No.3 for issuance of temporary license afresh without being influenced by the earlier order passed, after giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties. 17. Keeping in view the urgency as ventilated and in the light of the interest of the movie goers the said Opposite Party shall make an endeavour to pass Page 7 of 8 the order as per above directive as expeditiously as possible. 18. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. PKS (V. Narasingh) Judge Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: PRADEEP KUMAR SWAIN Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 23-Sep-2025 20:06:16 Page 8 of 8