IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE Writ Petition No. 1799 of 2005 --------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memo- Court’s or randa of Coram,appearances Judge’s orders Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s order. --------------------------------------------------- Petitioner in person. Shri C.R.Sonawane, A.G.P. for respondents. CORAM: A.P.SHAH AND CORAM: A.P.SHAH AND CORAM: A.P.SHAH AND J.H.BHATIA JJ. J.H.BHATIA JJ. J.H.BHATIA JJ. 8th July 2005 8th July 2005 8th July 2005 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. We have heard the petitioner who is appearing in person and Shri Sonawane, A.G.P. for respondents. Perused the order of the licensing authority as well as the order of the appellate authority. 2. Both the authorities have concurrently held that requirements of the rules have not been complied with for obtaining the video cinema theatre licence. It is not permissible to interfere with these findings of fact in Art.226. Therefore, the petition is dismissed. However, our order will not preclude the petitioner from making a fresh application after due compliance with the requirements and if such application is made the licensing authority will decide the same in accordance with law expeditiously. 3. Petition is disposed of accordingly.