Telangana High Court
WP/28083/2005 of M/s. Lahari Bar AND Restaurant, situated at Premises No.5-5, Vs The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad City, on 30 December 2005
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No. 28083 of 2005 Between: M/s. Lahari Bar & Restaurant, situated at Premises No.5-5, Shop
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FIVE
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAHWRIT PETITION No. 28083 of 2005
Between:
M/s. Lahari Bar & Restaurant,situated at Premises No.5-5, Shop No.3,Block No.M2, M.J.Road, Hyderabad,Rep by its Manager G.Ashok
AND
The Commissioner of Police,Hyderabad City, Basheerbagh,Hyderabad and another
.....RESPONDENTS
..... PETITIONER
Citations and Judicial Treatment
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…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed to declare the action of the respondents in interfering andpreventing the petitioners from running Bar and Restaurant in providingentertainment by way of live band/Orchestra with male and female singers in thepetitioner’s premises, as arbitrary, illegal and violative of the Judgment of the ApexCourt and consequently permit him for conducting the Orchestra/Live Band withmale and female singers in his premises.
The case of the petitioner is that he is the license holder for running Bar andRestaurant. He has obtained license from the Excise authorities to vend liquor inretail in the Bar in accordance with the provisions of the A.P. Excise Act and Rulesand renewing the license from time to time. Apart from the sale of liquor, thepetitioner is also serving food. Being the public place of amusement, the petitioner isrequired to take license from the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad; and that thepetitioner obtained license for establishment of a public entertainment (category II)on 04.07.2005 vide license No.326/2005-2006. The petitioner further contended thatthe said license granted for establishment of public place of amusement subject tocertain special conditions authorizing the petitioner to transact the liquor businessfrom 10 AM to 11 PM under the relevant rules and condition No.12 goes to show thatthe license shall not make use of the loud speaker or radio except under the specialcircumstances in such public places of halting which is situated on the joint of fourroads, three roads or cross roads and which has no footpaths in front of it. As percondition No.11 no person, who has established a public place of halting shall usethe loud speaker in the public place halting during the other timings than those,which have been permitted by the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad city. It is notknown whether any permission has been given to the petitioner either to have a loudspeakers or live band/Orchestra to be played with men and women. But however, it is stated that the petitioner has made a representation on 01.12.2005 to the 1[st] respondent requesting to permit him to have a live band/Orchestra with male andfemale singers.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a batch of writ petitionshave been disposed of on 09-11-2005 directing the first respondent to consider andpass appropriate orders on the representations made by the petitioners therein. Asthe respondents have so far not complied with the orders, the writ petitionerspreferred a batch of writ appeals which were disposed of by a Division Bench of thisCourt, on 23.12.2005, directing the respondents to pass appropriate orders on therepresentations of the applicants and the applicants were allowed to carry on theiractivities in accordance with the licenses granted and that if the appellants feelaggrieved by the orders which may be passed by the first respondent, then theyshall be free to avail appropriate legal remedy.
Conclusion
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, and following theorder of the Division Bench of this Court, the writ petition is disposed of directing thefirst respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on the representation madeby the petitioner for allowing him to have live band/Orchestra in his Bar andRestaurant with male and female singers in accordance with the license issued tohim. Further, the respondents shall also not interfere with the activity, if the petitioneruses live band/Orchestra. However, if other activities are carried out in the Bar andRestaurant, the authorities concerned shall be free to take appropriate action inaccordance with law. If the petitioner feels aggrieved by the orders, which may bepassed by the first respondent, then he shall be free to avail appropriate legalremedy.
With the direction indicated above, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of theJudgment of the Division Bench in a batch of writ appeals. No costs.
Dated: 30.12.2005
Dsr
_________________
V.ESWARAIAH,J