Telangana High Court
WP/23818/2004 of M/s.Red Knight Bar ANDRestaurant a Partnership firm Vs Commissioner of Police on 30 December 2004
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 23818 of 2004 Between: M/s.Red Knight Bar &Restaurant a Partnership firm rep
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDYWRIT PETITION NO : 23818 of 2004
Between:
M/s.Red Knight Bar &Restaurant a Partnership firm rep by its Parner Mr.B.SrinivasYadav Kumar, S/o.B.Mallesh, R/o.Hyderabad, situate atPremises No.12-11-1558, Boudha Nagar, Secunderabad.
... PETITIONER
AND
1 The Commissioner of Police, Twin-cities, Hyderabad.
2 The Deputy Commissioner of Police,
North Zone, Hyderabad.
3 The Station House Officer, Chilakalaguda Police Station Chilakalaguda, Hyderabad.
...RESPONDENTS
Petition filed under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased topleased to issue any appropriate writ, order or direction, preferably a writ in thenature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the order in proceedingNo.L&O/A3/1524/2004 dt 28-8-2004 issued by the 1st Respondent as being illegal,arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India andconsequently suspend the said order and also direct the 1st respondent to forthwithgrant Amusement License to the petitioner firm to hold Music and Singing byengaging male and female singers in its Bar and Restaurant for the year 2004 andpass such other order or orders.
Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.VENUGOPAL
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR HOME
The Court at the stage of admission made the following :
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:
The petitioner applied to the 1[st] respondent for grant of amusement licence underHyderabad Secunderabad Amusement Rules. Through an order dated 28-08-2004,the 1[st] respondent rejected the application. The petitioner challenges the same.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 1[st] respondent rejected theapplication on two grounds, viz., that the parking area is not sufficient, and that thegrant of licence may result in law and order problem; and that both grounds areeither non-existence or irrelevant. He contends that the petitioner provided adequateparking place, and that the question of emergence of law and order problem doesnot arise, because the petitioner is yet to conduct its activities.
Learned Government Pleader for Home, on the other hand, submits that theapplication was for the period from 01-01-2004 to 31-12-2004, and since the yearitself has come to an end, nothing remains to be adjudicated in this writ petition.
The application of the petitioner was for a period of one year ending with 31-12-2004. This Court would certainly have gone into the validity of the reasons, on thebasis of which the 1[st] respondent rejected the application, but for the fact that theperiod itself has come to an end. The petitioner can certainly make an application forthe next year, and in such an event, the application needs to be considered,independently, and uninfluenced by any findings recorded by the 1[st] respondent. Itis also made clear that if the 1[st] respondent entertains any doubt as to compliance ofconditions by the petitioner, he shall require him to place such additional material,as is required. In the event of the petitioner submitting an application, appropriateorders thereon shall be passed, within a period of four weeks from the date ofpresentation.
The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.
_______________________
Dt.30-12-2004.
C.C. tomorrow.
(B/o)
KO
To
1 The Commissioner of Police, Twin-cities, Hyderabad.
2 The Deputy Commissioner of Police,
North Zone, Hyderabad.
3 The Station House Officer, Chilakalaguda Police Station, Chilakalaguda, Hyderabad.
4 2 CCs to G.P.for Home, High Court of A.P., High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT).
5 2 CD copies