APHC010321482022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 19166 OF 2022 Between: 1. M/s.Dwarakanatha Talkies, B.Kothakota, B.Kothakota Mandal, Chittoor District rep.by its Proprietor. Namburi Siva Prasad, S/o. Late N.Vijaya Kumar Aged 42 years, Occ- Business R/o. D.No.16-54, Panchayat Street, Jayasree Colony, B.Kothakota post and Mandal, Chittoor District. 2. ...Petitioners AND State of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Amaravati, Guntur District. Joint Collector and Licensing Authority, Chittoor District. Sub-Collector, Madanapalle, Chittoor District. Tahsildar, B.Kothakota Mandal, Chittoor District Namburi Subbaramaiah, S/o. Late Ramaswamy Chetty, Occ-Business R/o. Beerangi Kothakota Panchayat, B.Kothakota. Mandal, Chittoor District. N Lakshmi Kumari, W/o. Chandra Kumar, R/o. B. Kothakota Village and Mandal, Chittoor District. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue any writ, order or direction more particularlyone in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the proceedings in File.No. REV02- MSOCG/1/2022-JA(C2)-ANIVICO, DATED 28-06-2022 issued, by the 2 respondent is illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and to consequently set-aside the same. nd lA NO: 1 OF 2022 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased be pleased to suspend the operation of the proceedings in File.No. REV02- MSOCG/1/2022-JA(C2)-ANMCO, DATED 28-06-2022 issued by the 2 respondent pending disposal of the writ petition. nd lA NO: 2 OF 2022 Between: Joint Collector and Licensing Authority, Chittoor District. ...Petitioners AND 1. M/s.Dwarakanatha Talkies, B.Kothakota, B.Kothakota Mandal, Chittoor District rep.by its Proprietor. Namburi Siva Prasad, S/o. Late N.Vijaya Kumar Aged 42 years, Occ-Business R/o. D.No. 16-54, Panchayat Street, Jayasree Colony B.Kothakota post and Mandal, Chittoor District. 2. ...Respondents/Petitioners State of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Amaravati, Guntur District. Sub-Collector, Madanapalle, Chittoor District. Tahsildar, B.Kothakota Mandal, Chittoor District Namburi Subbaramaiah, S/o. Late Ramaswamy Chetty, Occ- Business R/o. Beerangi Kothakota Panchayat, B.Kothakota. Mandal, Chittoor District. N Lakshmi Kumari, W/o. Chandra Kumar, R/o. B. Kothakota Village and Mandal, Chittoor District. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. ...Respondents/Respondents Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim orders dated 05-07-2022 in lA 1/2022 in WP. 19166/2022 and dismiss the writ petition. lA NO: 1 OF 2023 Between: Namburi Subbaramaiah, S/o. Late Ramaswamy Chetty, Occ-Business R/o. Beerangi Kothakota Panchayat, B.Kothakota. Mandal, Chittoor District. ...Petitioner/5*^ Respondent AND 1. M/s.Dwarakanatha Talkies, B.Kothakota, B.Kothakota Mandal, Chittoor District rep.by its Proprietor. ...Respondents/Writ Petitioners Namburi Siva Prasad, S/o. Late N.Vijaya Kumar Aged 42 years, Occ- Business R/o. D.No. 16-54, Panchayat Street, Jayasree Colony, B.Kothakota post and Mandal, Chittoor District. State of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Amaravati, Guntur District. Joint Collector and Licensing Authority, Chittoor District. Sub-Collector, Madanapalle, Chittoor District. Tahsildar, B.Kothakota Mandal, Chittoor District N Lakshmi Kumari, W/o. Chandra Kumar, R/o. B. Kothakota Village and Mandal, Chittoor District. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. ...Respondents/Respondent Nos.1 to 4 & 6 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim order dated 05-07-2022 passed in I.A.No. 01 of 2022 in W.P.No. 19166 of 2022 in the interest of justice. lA NO: 2 OF 2023 Between; N Lakshmi Kumari, W/o. Chandra Kumar, R/o. B. Kothakota Village and Mandal, Chittoor District. ...Petitioner/Respondent No.6 AND 1. M/s.Dwarakanatha Talkies, B.Kothakota, B.Kothakota Mandal, Chittoor District rep.by its Proprietor. Namburi Siva Prasad, S/o. Late N.Vijaya Kumar Aged 42 years, Occ-Business R/o. D.No. 16-54, Panchayat Street, Jayasree Colony B.Kothakota post and Mandal, Chittoor District. 2. ...Respondents/Writ Petitioners State of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Amaravati, Guntur District. Joint Collector and Licensing Authority, Chittoor District. Sub-Collector, Madanapalle, Chittoor District. Tahsildar, B.Kothakota Mandal, Chittoor District Namburi Subbaramaiah, S/o. Late Ramaswamy Chetty, Occ- Business R/o. Beerangi Kothakota Panchayat, B.Kothakota. Mandal, Chittoor District. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. ...Respondents Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim order dated 5-7-2022 passed in lA No.1 of 2022 in WP 19166 of 2022 in the interest of Justice and to dismiss the writ petition with exemplary costs in the interest of justice. lA NO: 3 OF 2023 Petition under Section Rule-12 Sub rule (ii) of Rules, 1977, r/w. Section 15 of CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant leave to the petitioner in W.P. No. 19166 of 2023 to file reply affidavit in the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI V V SATISH Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondents: SRI MUTYALA SOBHANADRI NAIDU Counsel for the Respondents: SRI P VIVEK Counsel for the Respondents: SRI A.SAI ROHIT The Court made the following order: 1 HN, J W.P.No.l9166_2022 APHC010321482022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] THURSDAY ,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 19166/2022 Between: ...PETITIONER(S) M/s.dwarakanatha Talkies and Others AND ...RESPONDENT(S) State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petltioner(S): 1.VVSATISH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR HOME 2.GP FOR REVENUE 3.MUTYALASOBHANADRI NAIDU 4.P VIVEK HN,J W.P.No.19166 2022 The Court made the following Order: The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitionersare aggrieved by the order dated 28.06.2022 passed by the 2^^ respondent, whereby the 2'"’^ respondent has confirmed the orders of the then Joint Collector and Licensing Authority, Chittoor,wc/e Roc.No.C1/REV-CSECOCA(MIS)/3/2022) dated 30.10.2021. 1. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioner’s father was the initial licensing holder for running a cinema theater,and that Form-B license was granted to the petitioner’s father in place of his mother, v/de proceedings dated 08.01.1990. The petitioner’s father was running the theater till his death in 2015. Thereafter, the petitioner’s brother took charge of the theater a legal heir and continued its operations. He also applied for the transfer of licensein his name. During the pendency of those proceedings, the petitioner’s brother passed away. Subsequently, the petitioner filed an application seeking transfer of the license in his forrenewal of the licenseto the 2"^^ respondent on 29.06.2020. as The petitioner submittedthis application name. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the 2"^ respondent rejected the application of the petitioner vide proceedings dated 30.10.2021, which was challenged by the petitioners in W.P.No.3694 of 2022. The learned Judge of this Court, vide order dated 11.03.2022,closed the writ petition by relegating the matter back to the 2""' respondent with a direction to issue notice of allconcerned parties, consider their submissions on both legal and factual issues, and take a decision on the matter, dated 30.12.2021. The learned Judge also set aside the impugned order It is submitted that once the order was set aside by the Court, 3 HN,J W.P.No.19166 2022 the respondent could not have restored an order that was nolonger in existence at the time of passing the impugned order in the present writ petition. Moreover, it is submitted that the Tahsildar, who submitted the report, cannot determine the title of the property. UnderRule 5(2), the 2"^' respondent is required to verify the position of the building and pass appropriate orders. Retiance is also placed on Rule 11(a)(b) of the Andhra Pradesh Cinema (Regulation) Rutes, 1970,which deals with applicationsthe for grant of licenses and the procedure for grantinglicenses to cinema theaters. In any case, it is submitted that the 2"'‘ respondent could not have restored an order which was non-existent. The learned Assistant Government Pleader, appearing for the 2"^ respondent, submits that the 2"^ respondent has filed a detailed counter affidavit narrating the history of the case,including details of the joint family property, and refers to O.S 4. No.5 of 2004, which v^as decreed on 30.06.2012, and the pendency of an appeal before this court. The learned Assistant Government Pleader further submits that the joint 5. family property belongs toboth the petitioners and the respondents. It is submitted that, in compliance with the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.3694 of 2022, the 2"*^ respondent conducted a denova enquiry and passedorders confirming the earlier cancellation orders. It is submitted that the applicant seeking the grant of a Form-B licensemust also demonstratepossession of the property and provide a No Objection Certificate from other concerned parties. The learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.4 and 5 has filed a counter affidavit and a vacate .stay petition.He submits that the petitioner was given 6. nd an opportunity of hearing and was allowed to make submissions before the 2 4 HN, J W.P.No.19166 2022 respondent,as evident from the notice dated 15.06.2022. Both the petitioner and the respondents appeared and presented their respective versions for consideration before the 2"^* respondent.The learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.4 and 5 further submits that the property is a joint family property, and the petitioners cannot claim sole ownership or possession. It is also contended that thelicense, which expired in the year 2013,could not have been renewed with antedated proceedings. It is submitted that a fresh application would have to be filed by the petitioner, subject to the contentions raised by respondent Nos.4 and 5. The impugned order dated 28.06.2022 confirming the orders passed by the Joint Collector and Licensing Authority, Chittoor vide ROC.C1/REV-CSECOCA(MIS/3/2022), dated 30.10.2021 would have to be set aside for the following grounds. The proceedings of the Joint Collector were set aside by the orders passed by this Court in WP.No.3694 of 2022. It was further directed to issue notice to all concerned parties and the concerned parties to be heard before any decision taken. The impugned proceedings have ratified the Joint Collector proceedings which are set aside by this Court. Such powers do not vest with the 2'^'* respondent. The provisions of AP Cinemas Regulation Act, 1955 and 1970 Rules would have to be strictly adhered to by the respondent/authorities before considering the application for renewal of license. The dispute with regard to the ownership of the property between the 2 petitioner and respondents 5 and 6 would have to be considered by the appropriate Civil Court where the parties are at dispute over the title. The impugned proceedings deserves to be set aside and a fresh application for permission of 7. 8. IS 9. nd 5 HN, J W.P.No.19166 2022 running a Cinema Theater would have to be filed. Admittedly, no application for renewal was filed three months prior to expiry of the license as per Rule 12(b). A fresh application for grant of license under Rule 11(d) would have to be filed afresh by the party seeking license, it is left open for the petitioners and respondents 5 and 6 to decide amongst themselves the way forward in handling the property and seeking a fresh license. The impugned order is hereby set aside, however, it is made clear that the fresh application would have to be filed by the concerned party seeking a fresh license and any such application received by the 2^^* respondent the same would be considered in accordance with the Act and Rules. 10. With these observations, the Writ Petition is disposed off. There shall be no 11. order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. The Principal Secretary, Home Department, State of Andhra Pradesh Secretariat, Amaravati, Guntur District. 2. Joint Collector and Licensing Authority, Chittoor District. 3. Sub-Collector, Madanapalle, Chitoor District. 4. Tahsildar, B.Kothakota Mandal, Chittoor District 5. One CC to Sri V V Satish, Advocate [OPUC] 6. One CC to Sri Mutyala Sobhanadri Naidu, Advocate [OPUC] 7. One CC to Sri P Vivek, Advocate [OPUC] 8. One CC to Sri A. Sai Rohit, Advocate [OPUC] 9. Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] Two CCs to GP for Revenue, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. 10. [OUT] 11. Two CD Copies RAM % HIGH COURT DATED:24/04/2025 ORDER WP.No. 19166 of 2022 ^ (I3JUL2IK5 rn CO ^^Nwr.urrentSecti DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS