Telangana High Court

WP/27804/2005 of M/s. Naivedyam Veg. Restaurant G.N. International Lodge, Vs The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad City, on 28 December 2005

Cites 0, Cited by 0

SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH W.P.NO.27804 OF 2005 Between: M/s Naivedyam Veg.Restaurant G.N.International Lodge … Petitioner AND The Commissioner of Police Hyderabad Basheerbagh, Hyderabad & others. … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH W.P.NO.27804 OF

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH

W.P.NO.27804 OF 2005

Between:

M/s Naivedyam Veg.Restaurant

G.N.International Lodge

AND

The Commissioner of Police Hyderabad

Basheerbagh, Hyderabad

& others.

… Petitioner

… Respondents

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH

W.P.NO.27804 OF 2005

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed to declare the action of the respondents in interferingand preventing the petitioner from running Bar and Restaurant in providingentertainment by way of live band/Orchestra with male and female singers inthe petitioner’s premises, as arbitrary, illegal and violative of the Judgment of the Apex Court and consequently permit the petitioner for conducting theOrchestra/Live Band with male and female singers in its premises.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has obtainedlicence on 11.07.2005 from the concerned authorities to vend eatables andproviding entertainment etc. in accordance with the licence for establishment ofpeace of public entertainment. Being the public place of amusement, thepetitioner is required to take licence from the Commissioner of Police,Hyderabad; and that the petitioner obtained licence for establishment of a publicentertainment (category II) on 23.06.2005 vide L.&O/A4/2454/2004, liceneNo.89 of 2005. The learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that thesaid licence granted for establishment of public place of amusement subject tocertain special conditions authorizing the petitioner to transact the liquorbusiness from 10 AM to 11 PM under the relevant excise rules and conditionNo.12 goes to show that the licence shall not make use of the loud speaker orradio except under the special circumstances in such public places of haltingwhich is situated on the joint of four roads, three roads or cross roads andwhich has no footpaths in front of it. As per condition No.11 no person, who hasestablished a public place of halting shall use the loud speaker in the publicplace halting during the other timings than those, which have been permitted bythe Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad city. It is not known whether anypermission has been given to the petitioners either to have a loud speakers orlive band/Orchestra to be played with men and women. But however, it isstated that the petitioner has made a representation on 26.12.2005 forpermitting the petitioner to have a live band/Orchestra with male and femalesingers.

The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that a batch of writpetitions has been disposed of on 09.11.2005 directing the first respondent toconsider and pass appropriate orders on the representations made by thepetitioners therein. As the respondents have so far not complied with theorders, the writ petitioners preferred a batch of writ appeals which weredisposed of by a Division Bench of this Court, on 23.12.2005, directing therespondents to pass appropriate orders on the representations of the applicantsand the applicants were allowed to carry on their activities in accordance withthe licences granted and that if the appellants feel aggrieved by the orders which may be passed by the first respondent, then they shall be free to availappropriate legal remedy.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, and followingthe order of the Division Bench of this Court, the writ petition is disposed ofdirecting the first respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on therepresentation made by the petitioner for allowing it to have live band/Orchestrain his Bar and Restaurant with male and female singers in accordance with thelicence issued to the petitoner. Further, the respondents shall also not interferewith the activity, if the petitioner uses live band/Orchestra with men and womensingers. However, if other activities are carried out in the Bar and Restaurant,the authorities concerned shall be free to take appropriate action in accordancewith law. If the petitioners feel aggrieved by the orders, which may be passedby the first respondent, then the petitioner shall be free to avail appropriatelegal remedy.

With the direction indicated above, the writ petition is disposed of in terms ofthe Judgment of the Division Bench in a batch of writ appeals. No costs.

____________

28-12-2005

Kvrm

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead