THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.12112 of 1996 ORDER: The petitioner is the proprietor of a Cinema Theatre at Kandukur, Prakasam District. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kandukur, visited the theatre on 20.01.1996 and found that the petitioner violated the conditions of licence, be it as regards the seating capacity or the maintenance of proper sanitary conditions. On the basis of the report, the Joint Collector, Prakasam, the second respondent, issued a show cause notice to the petitioner on 26.02.1996, directing the petitioner to explain as to why a fine of Rs.10,000/- be not levied. The petitioner submitted his explanation on 15.03.1996. Not being satisfied with the explanation, the second respondent passed an order, dated 10.05.1996, imposing the fine of Rs.10,000/-. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the first respondent. The appeal was returned by stating that the petitioner should pay a further amount of Rs.100/- towards Court fee and that the entire amount of Rs.10,000/- , imposed as fine, must be deposited. The petitioner feels aggrieved by the orders passed by the respondents. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Home. The petitioner contends that there was failure of power supply at about 7 p.m., when the picture was being exhibited and not being able to bear the suffocation, the audience in the theatre from the second class have shifted to the first class area and this, in turn, was treated as a violation on the part of the petitioner. It is also stated that the sanitary conditions were maintained properly. After issuing a show cause notice, the second respondent passed an order imposing the fine of Rs.10,000/-. The stand taken by the first respondent in issuing memo, dated 04.06.1996, requiring the petitioner to deposit the entire amount of Rs.10,000/-, cannot be countenanced. There is no provision under the A.P. Cinema Regulation Act or the Rules made thereunder requiring an appellant to deposit the entire amount imposed as fine. As a matter of fact, if the entire fine is deposited, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the appeal. Such a step can be resorted to on specific provision of law. Strictly speaking, it is a case where the first respondent is required to entertain the appeal, without insisting on the deposit of fine amount. The second respondent passed order against the petitioner way back in the year 1996. While admitting the writ petition, this Court granted stay on payment of Rs.2,500/-. It is stated that the amount has since been deposited. This Court is of the view that the ends of justice would be met, if the petitioner is required to pay a further sum of Rs.1,000/-. Hence, the Writ Petition is partly allowed modifying the order, dated 10.05.1996, passed by the second respondent reducing the amount of fine to Rs.3,500/-. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J Dt.29.12.2008 GJ