THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.14303 of 2010 Date: 30.6.2010 Between: M/s.Sri Mahalakshmi Sports and Association, Habsiguda, Hyderabad. ………...Petitioner. And The Commissioner of Police, East Zone, Hyderabad and others. …… Respondents. THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.14303 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioner-Association was incorporated on 28.5.2010 with an object to create interest among the people for taking part in cultural activities and other recreation activities, to conduct sports, indoor and out door games, to conduct health camps, to start health clubs etc for its members. It is the grievance of the petitioner-Association that the Station House Officer, Osmania University Police Station, Hyderabad-4th respondent has been demanding for production of licence under Section 21(f)(i) of the Hyderabad City Police Act to run their Association, though the Association is not required to obtain such licence when the activities are confined to its members. When the writ petition came up for admission, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home takes notice on behalf of the respondents. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. Since the issue involved in the writ petition is squarely covered by the judgement of this Court in Nizam Club v. The Commissioner of Police and Additional District Magistrate, West Zone, Hyderabad[1], this writ petition is also taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. In Nizam Club v. The Commissioner of Police and Additional District Magistrate, West Zone, Hyderabad (1 supra) this Court considered the question whether a private Club restricting entry only to its members is required to take licence under Section 21 (f) (i) of the Act. Under Section 21 (f) (i) of the Act a place of public entertainment cannot be run without licence from the police. This Court, after considering the various provisions of the act, held as under: “As per above definitions to be a place of public, place of amusement or a place of entertainment, the public must be admitted to that place. The petitioner-Club is only meant for its members and their guests and the public are not allowed to come to the Club, like cinema theatre or any public place of amusement. A similar question arose under Municipalities Act regarding the same Club, in The Nizam Club, Hyderabad v. The Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad and Another[2] wherein the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad issued a notice to the Club to take a licence as the Club is maintaining the eating house. As per the definition of “eating house” under Section 2 (15) of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act the public must be admitted in that eating house. But where it is a Club into which only its members and their guests are allowed but not the public or even a section of the public, this Court held, the Club is meant for profit or gain of the Club. Thus, it was held that the Club need not obtain any licence as contemplated under Sections 2(15) and 521(1) (e)(ii) of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act. Some analogy applies here also. Sections 3 (g) and 3(h) of the Hyderabad City Police Act contemplate only places where the public are admitted. Therefore, in view of the above said circumstances, there is no necessity to the petitioner-Club to take licence under Section 21 (f)(1) of the Hyderabad City Police Act.” The view of this Court in Nizam Club v. The Commissioner of Police and Additional District Magistrate, West Zone, Hyderabad (1 supra) case was subsequently followed in Writ Petition No.26983 of 1997, dated 21.10.1997. The legal position is neither disputed nor denied. Therefore, following the above decision of this Court, the writ petition is disposed of declaring that as long as the petitioner carries on lawful activities like cultural activities, recreational activities, educational activities restricting the benefits only its members, the petitioner is not in law required to obtain any licence under Section 21 (f) (i) of the Act. With the above observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ______________________________________ JUSTICE B. SESHASAYANA REDDY Date:30.6.2010 mrb [1] 1990 (1) ALT 355 [2] 1986 APHC Notes P.1