IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.29027 OF 2010 DATED:23.11.2010 Between: Sri Raghavendra Theatre Ayodhya Nagar, Vijayawada Krishna District Rep. by its Partner Mr. K.V. Raghavendra Kumar … Petitioner And Government of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Secretary (Home) Secretariat, Hyderabad and another … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.29027 OF 2010 ORDER: Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, this Writ Petition is being disposed of at the stage of admission. The petitioner – theatre has submitted an application to the second respondent – competent authority on 02.08.2010 for revision of seating capacity in various classes, namely, Balcony, II Class and III Class. The existing seating capacity of the theatre in the four classes is 520. By application dt.2.8.2010 the petitioner represented to increase the seats in Balcony and to decrease the seats in II and III Classes. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that based on the application filed by the petitioner, a report is called for by the second respondent from the Executive Engineer, Roads and Buildings Department, Vijayawada, who has submitted his report, by Letter No.1482/EC2/2010 dt.3.9.2010. In this writ petition, it is the grievance of the petitioner that in spite of such report from the Executive Engineer, no further orders are passed by the second respondent by considering the claim of the petitioner. In view of the pendency of the application of the petitioner dt.02.8.2010 before the second respondent, it is not desirable to record any finding on the claim of the petitioner for revision of the seats in the theatre. The second respondent is the competent authority under the Andhra Pradesh Cinemas (Regulation) Rules, 1970, framed under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Cinema (Regulation) Act, 1955. Inasmuch as the report of the Executive Engineer, Roads & Buildings Department is submitted, I deem it proper to dispose of the writ petition directing the second respondent to pass an appropriate order on the application of the petitioner dt.2.8.2010 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Subject to the above observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _____________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 23.11.2010 bnr Note: C.C. in three days. (B.O) bnr