( 1 ) IN this Writ Petition a question of general importance and frequent occurrence is raised by Sri K. Manikyal Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the question being whether the second proviso to Rule 9-B (c) of the A. P. Cinemas (Regulation) Rules, 1970, can be invoked in aid by an applicant for grant of permission to construct a cinema building when he furnishes false particulars or information in the application made by him to the licensing authority in Form A-I, which, when brought to the notice of the licensing authority, necessitates an enquiry into the truth or otherwise of the same, completion of which may exceed three months time. In view of the importance of the question raised, I am of the opinion that this Writ Petition shall be heard by a Division Bench as there is no authoritative pronouncement on the question raised. Place the papers before the honourable the Chief Justice for appropriate orders of posting at an early date.

( 2 ) THIS petition coming on for final hearing before the Honourable mr. Justice Sivaraman Nair and the Honourable Mr. Justice Eswara Prasad on 6-12-1991 pursuant to the order of reference of this Court dated 28-9-1989 and passed herein upon perusing the said order dated 28-9-1989 and the petition and the affidavit filed therein and the report of the Collector nizamabad dated 20-10-91 pursuant to this Court order dated 24-9-91 and upon hearing the arguments of the Counsels appearing on behalf of the parties concerned, the Court delivered the following Judgment.

( 3 ) THE petitioner M/s. Venkateswara Talkies seeks to quash the proceedings of first respondent, Government of Andhra Pradesh, dated 26-5-1986 in G. O. Rt. No. 1174, Home (General-A) Department as illegal and unconstitutional.

( 4 ) THE petitioner is a temporary cinema theatre running over fifteen years prior to the date of filing of the Writ Petition. The third respondent applied for issuance of a no objection certificate for the construction of a semi permanent theatre near the petitioner s theatre by applying to the second respondent Joint Collector, Nizamabad. The second respondent issued a no objection certificate by his proceedings dated 8-4-1985. The third respondent applied for permission to construct a cinema theatre on 9-4-1985. The application for issuance a no objection certificate sought by the third respondent was made under Rules 8 and 9 of the A. P. Cinemas (Regulation) rules, 1970 stating that the proposed theatre is at a distance of more than 1 K. M. from the existing theatre of the petitioner. , where as the actual distance between the petitioner theatre and the proposed theatre of the third respondent is only 700 metres. By mis-representation of facts relating to the distance the third respondent obtained a no objection certificate from the second respondent.

( 5 ) THE petitioner filed a petition before the District Collector, Nizamabad on 23-5-1985 objecting to grant of permission to the third respondent to construct a semi permanent or a temporary cinema theatre within the distance of 800 metres where a temporary cinema theatre exists. The Collector referred the matter to the Executive Engineer, P. W. D. (R and B) Nizamabad who submitted a report on 25-6-1985 stating that the distance between the petitioner-theatre and the proposed theatre of the third respondent is 700 metres, the Sub-Collector, Bodhan confirmed this by his proceedings dated 20-8-1985.

( 6 ) THE second respondent Joint Collector examined the matter in the light of the reports of the Executive Engineer and the Sub Collector and rejected the application of third respondent stating that the request of the third respondent is hit by Rule 7 (5) of the Rules, by his proceedings dated 13-9-1985. The third respondent approached the first respondent Government against the order of the second respondent by way of an appeal and the said appeal was allowed and the Collector, Nizamabad was directed to grant permission f