Cine Prekshakula Viniyoga Darula Sangham vs State of Telangana

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(SC) 884

D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, J. B. PARDIWALA
Cine Prekshakula Viniyoga Darula Sangham – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Hitendra Nath Rath, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. P Venkat Reddy, Advocate, Mr. Prashant Kumar Tyagi, Advocate, Mr. P Srinivas Reddy, Advocate, M/S. Venkat Palwai Law Associates, Advocate, Mr. S. Niranjan Reddy, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Mahfooz Ahsan Nazki, Advocate, Mr. Polanki Gowtham, Advocate, Mr. Shaik Mohamad Haneef, Advocate, Mr. T. Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy, Advocate, Ms. Rajeswari Mukherjee, Advocate, Mr. Sahil Raveen, Advocate, Mr. K V Girish Chowdary, Advocate, Mr. Krishna Dev Jagarlamudi, Advocate, Ms. Prerna Singh, Advocate, Mr. Guntur Pramod Kumar, Advocate, for the Respondent.

ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. By its judgment dated 23 October 2019, a Division Bench of the High Court for the State of Telangana dismissed Writ Petition (PIL) No 78 of 2017 as infructuous on the ground that the GOs which form the subject matter of challenge had by efflux of time come to an end.

3. The reliefs which were sought in the petition were in the following terms:

'(i) GO.RT No. 475 Dated: 08-10-2015, Revenue (Commercial Taxes-II) Department (ii) GO.RT. No. 4. Dated: 0601-2017, Revenue (Commercial Taxes-II) Department issued by the 2nd respondent (iii) GO.M.S.No. 14 Dated. 09-01-2017 and it's consequential (iv) GO.M.S.No.44 Dated. 31-01-2017 Revenue (Commercial Taxes-II) Department issued by the 5th respondent is as arbitrary, illegal malafide, unconstitutional and discriminatory violating Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and against the public Interest apart from country to section 8 of AP & Telangana Entertainment Tax Act 1939 as well as Rule 33,34 and 35 of Entertainment Tax Rules and set-aside the same and also consequently direct to the 3rd and 5th respondent to collect/recovery from the unofficial respondents which is occurs huge Crores of Rupees and kept it

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2023 Supreme(SC) 884

D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, J. B. PARDIWALACine Prekshakula Viniyoga Darula Sangham – AppellantVersusState of Telangana – Respondent

D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, J. B. PARDIWALA
Cine Prekshakula Viniyoga Darula Sangham – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent