IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No: 5673 of 2001 BETWEEN: 1 Sri. Rama Krishna Theatre, Rep. by its Managing Partner, G.R.V. Yadav, Machilipatnam, Krishna District. 2 Urvasi Mini A/c. Theatre, Rep. by its Managing Partner, D.V. Subba Rao, Machilipatnam, Krishna District. 3 Radhika Theatre, Rep. by its Managing Partner, D.V. Subba Rao, Machilipatnam, Krishna District. 4 Brundavan Talkies, Rep. by its Managing Partner, T. Surynanarayana Murthy, Machilipatnam, Krishna District. 5 Rama Santhi, Rep. by its Partner Murali Krishna, Machilipatnam, Krishna District. 6 Venkateswara Talkies, Rep. by its Partner, L. Murali Krishna, Machilipatnam, Krishna District. 7 Thiruganesh Pircture Palace, Rep. by its Partner, S. Mohan Rao, Machilipatnam, Krishna District. 8 Minarava Talkies, Rep. by its Managing Partner S. Mohan Rao, Machilipatnam, Krishna District. 9 Sri. Nataraj Picture Palace, Rep. by its Managing Partner, K. Srinivasulu, Machilipatnam, Krishna District. ... PETITIONERS AND The Joint Collector, Krishna District at Machilipatnam. ...RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the proceedings of the respondent in R.C.No.C5/134/M/ 2000, dt. 3.3.2001, imposing penalty of Re.10,000/- on each petitioner as illegal, null void, against principles of natural justice, and without jurisdiction, and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.M.S.PRASAD Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No: 18603 of 2002 BETWEEN: Sree Rama Krishna Theatre Rep by its Managing Partner & License G.Raj Venkateswar Yadav, Godufupet, Machilipatnam. ... PETITIONER AND Joint Collector & Licensing Authority, Krishna District. Machilipatnam. ...RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more Particularly one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the impugned proceedings of the respondent in RC.No.C5/433/M/2002, dt.19.8.2002 as illegal, null and void, without jurisdiction and against principles of natural justice and to pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.M.S.PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER: WP.No.18603 of 2002: The facts in brief are that the Mandal Revenue Officer, Machilipatnam inspected the petitioner-theatre and sent a report dated 31.03.2002 to the Joint Collector, Machilipatnam, Krishna District, based on which a show cause notice dated 11.04.2002 was to the petitioner alleging that as per the enquiry report of the MRO each black marketer is purchasing 10 to 15 tickets of each class and selling at higher rates; the theater management also failed to control queues while issuing tickets at counters as there was no proper queue system and the management is selling more number of tickets to the persons, who are known to be engaged in black marketing, as such it was assumed that the petitioner-theatre is indirectly engaged in black marketing of the tickets causing hardship to the public. Accordingly, the management was called upon to show cause as to why the penalty of Rs.10,000/- shall not be imposed. 2. Petitioner-theater submitted an explanation dated 19.04.2002 and requested for personal hearing and the date was also fixed for personal hearing on 24.06.2002 but the Joint Collector was otherwise busy and the personal hearing was adjourned to 12.08.2002. On 12.08.2002 the management of the petitioner-theatre failed to appear for personal hearing. Accordingly, the penalty of Rs.10,000/- was imposed. 3. I am of the opinion that, though the petitioner was not able to appear on 12.08.2002, there cannot be any justification in not considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner; without considering the explanation and without giving any reasonable opportunity, final orders have been passed. WP.No.5673 of 2001: 5. In the instant case also having issued separate show cause notices to the petitioners alleging that they have violated the terms and conditions of the licence, the explanations submitted by the petitioners have not been considered and none of the contentions raised in the explanations have been dealt with by the Joint Collector while passing the final orders imposing the penalty of Rs.10,000/- on each of the petitioners. 6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and as the final orders have been passed without considering any of the contentions raised in the explanations and without giving any reasonable opportunity, the impugned orders are set aside remanding the matter to the Joint Collector to consider the matter afresh giving reasonable opportunity to the petitioners once again and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J June 25, 2008 DSK