IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9414 of 2009 Ram Lakhan Prasad, son of Budh Lal Bhagat, Mohalla Chhotki Delha, Budhlal Bhagat Lane, Gaya, PS Delha, District Gaya – Petitioner. Vs. 1) The State of Bihar, 2) The Dist. Magistrate, Gaya. 3) The Addl. Collector Naxal cum Senior Officer, Gaya. 4) The Dy. Collector, General Section, Gaya. 5) The Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Building Division, Gaya. 6) The Anchal Adhikari, Town Block, Gaya. 7) The Officer Incharge, Delha P.S. Gaya. 8) The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Gaya – Respondents. 5 11.11.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the Gaya Municipal Corporation. No counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State in this case. The petitioner has challenged the letter issued by the Municipal Commissioner, Gaya Municipal Corporation contained in Annexure 8 addressed to the Additional Collector, Gaya. An objection has been raised by the Corporation that for cinema hall which the petitioner wishes to build on plot no. 536, khata no. 54 measuring 60 ½ decimals (83 decimals as per the report of the Executive Engineer) in Mohalla Chhotki Delha Kharkhua in the town of Gaya, falls in a residential area, and contravenes the provisions of the Rules. The petitioner applied as per the Bihar Cinema (Regulation) Rules, 1974 to the District Magistrate. The District Magistrate has been described as the licensing authority as per rule 3 of the aforesaid Rules. An objection has been raised by the Municipal Corporation, Gaya relying on sub-rule (b) of rule 4 of 2 the Rules which reads as follows: “that no permanent or temporary cinema shall be allowed to be constructed on the site which may upset the Master Plan or in any thickly populated area which is either exclusively residential or a restricted area or used generally for residential purpose as distinguished from business purpose. “provided that the licensing authority may for sufficient reasons and with the prior approval of the State Government relax this rule or any part thereof in any case and specially in the case of cinema houses already completed or nearing completion with the approval of the authorities empowered in this behalf or the State Government prior to the commencement of these rules”. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the District Magistrate has issued a general notice vide Annexure 3, so that if any objects to the construction of the cinema hall, such persons may approach the District Magistrate. It is apparent from Annexure 7 that the Additional Collector has sent the matter to the Municipal Corporation, Gaya with respect to the proposed land to build a cinema hall. On receipt of Annexure 7, Annexure 8 has been issued raising an objection that the land of the petitioner is situated in a residential area and as such the cinema hall cannot be built in the said area. An ultimate decision has to be taken by the District Magistrate after considering the proviso under the Rules for construction of a cinema hall. It, thus, appears from the rules that 3 the cinema hall cannot be allowed to be built in a residential area unless the State Government under the proviso to rule 4 makes a relaxation in the said rule. The petitioner would be at liberty to make a representation before the State Government for relaxation of rules, if so advised. At this stage this court cannot pass any positive order in this case. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of. haque ( Sheema Ali Khan, J .)