JUDGMENT

S. C. AGRAWAL, J.:—Leave granted.

2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. These appeals raise the question whether the place wherein an exhibition of cinematograph films recorded on a video cassette is given on a large screen by the technology of video cassette recorder/player (VCR/VCP) and Video Projector can be regarded a "video cinema" as defined in Rule 2(f-6) of the Maharashtra Cinemas (Regulation) Rules, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules).

4. The Cinematograph Act, 1952 has been enacted by Parliament to make provision for the certification of cinematograph films for exhibition and for regulating exhibitions by means of cinematograph. The expression "cinematograph" is defined in Section 2(c) of the said Act to include any apparatus for the representation of moving pictures or series of pictures. The Bombay Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1953, hereinafter referred to as the Act, has been enacted by the legislature of the erstwhile State of Bombay to provide for regulating exhibitions by means of cinematographs and the licensing of places in which cinematograph films are exhibited in the State of Maharashtra. The expression "cinematograph" is defined in Section 2(a) of the Act in the same terms as that expression is defined in Section 2(c) of the Cinematograph Act, 1952 referred to above. In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 9 of the Act, the Government of Maharashtra has made the Rules. In Dinesh Kumar Hanuman Prasad Tiwari v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1984 Bom 34, the Bombay High Court has held that a VCR used for playing pre-recorded cassettes of movies on the screen of a television set comes within the .definition of cinematograph as defined under the Cinematograph Act, 1952 and exhibition of films-by playing pre-recorded cassettes on VCR and TV in cafes and restaurants comes within the ban contained in Section 3 of the Act, which prohibits exhibition by means of a cinematograph elsewhere than a place licensed under the Act. Thereafter, the Government of Maharashtra amended the Rules by the Maharashtra Cinemas (Regulation) (Amendment) Rules, 1987. As a result of the said amendment in the Rules, the definition of cinema as contained in clause (c) of Rule 2 was amended to include a video cinema and the expression "video cinema" was defined in clause (f-6) of Rule 2 to mean "any place wherein an exhibition of moving pictures or series of pictures is given by means of video cassette recorder, video cassette player, or any such similar instrument or device through the medium of television". A new Chapter III-B (Rules 24-C and 24-J) containing special provisions relating to video-cinemas was inserted in the Rules. Rules 24-C to 24-H relate to licence for video cinema. In Rule 24-I, provisions have been made with regard to requirements of a video cinema. Rule 24-J provides that in addition to the provisions of Chapter III-B, provisions of Chapter I, Rules 3 and 4 of Chapter II, Rules 103 and 104 of Chapter VII, Rules 116, 125, 127 to 129 of Chapter IX and Rules 131 to 133 of Chapter X, shall mutatis mutandis apply to the video-cinema and that no other provision of the Rules shall apply to the video cinema.

5. The appellants in appeal arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No. 13015/92 have installed a video projector system called "ENTEL" based on the technology developed by NEC Corporation, Japan, whereby pre-recorded movies on a video cassette can be exhibited with the aid of a VCR/ VCP on a wide screen or a wall. The said appellants obtained licences under the Rules on the basis that they are running a video cinema since 1988. Under the said licences the said appellants were permitted to give exhibition by means of VCR/VCP for a charge of Rs. 2 per person with a permitted seating capacity of 75 persons. Swapnalok Touring Talkies, respondent No. 3 in the said appeal, were having a licence to run a touring cinema. They filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court wherein the grant of licences to the a