Back
In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
S.S. SHINDE, J.
Anandsagar Bahuddeshiya Social Krida Mandal (Sanstha)
Versus
The State of Maharashtra, Through its Principal Secretary, Home Department & Others
Writ Petition No.8104 of 2012
Decided On : 15-04-2013
Since act of petitioner to start social club/card room cannot be termed as illegal or contrary to procedure provided for by respondents hence registration of criminal cases under Section 33(1)(b) of Act against members of petitioner, trust unwarranted. - In the present case registration of the criminal case against the members of the petitioner trust under Section 33(b)(1)/131 of the Bombay Police Act, was in contravention and de hors the procedure/ provision under the Rules. The act of the petitioner to start social club/card room cannot be termed as illegal or contrary to procedure rather it is in consonance with the procedure provided for by the respondents. There is no denial that, there is a time limit for considering the application and communicating the decision on such application and therefore, it can safely be concluded that, the action of the police department to register N.C. against 1 the petitioner trust was arbitrary exercise of the powers vested in the concerned authorities.
The refore, relying upon the said non-cognizable offence registered against the petitioner, the respondents could not have said in affidavit in reply that, in view of registration of non-cognizable offence against the petitioner, the permission cannot be granted. It is crystal clear that, the respondents have created the aforesaid ground by registering the non-cognizable offence against the petitioner trust, so as to refuse premises licence on that ground to the petitioner.
Therefore, such ground created by the respondent authorities so as to deny premises licence to the petitioner cannot sustain and on that ground, the respondent could not have refused the premises licence.
Rejection of the licence must be founded upon relevant grounds of public interest. Fair play and natural justice are part of fair public administration; non-arbitrariness and absence of discrimination are hallmarks for good governance under rule of law.
Therefore, the respondent could not have rejected the application for premises licence to run social club/card room on the ground that, the members of the petitioner society/trust have not submitted income tax returns, audit report, not disclosing the source of income for organizing funds etc. In the facts of this case, taking into consideration the material placed on record including replies filed by the respondents, there is no manner of doubt that, the respondents were bent upon to search irrelevant reasons/conditions/ requirements so as to reject the application of the petitioner for premises licence though such conditions/requirements have no place either in the statute or rules.
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
Heard finally with the consent of the parties.
2. This writ petition takes exception to the order dated 3/6-09-2012 passed by respondent No. 1 dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner and the order dated 29-02-2012 passed by respondent Nos. 3 and 4 thereby refusing to grant licence to start and run the Social Club/Card Room in favour of the petitioner.
3. The facts leading to file this writ petition, as disclosed in the writ petition, are as under:-
The petitioner is registered under the provisions of Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 with the aim and object to open Social Club for amusement of its members. The petitioner herein, is the original appellant in appeal filed before respondent Nos. 1 and 2. The said appeal was filed challenging the order dated 29-02-2012 passed by respondent Nos. 3 and 4. Respondent No.1 herein, is the Principal Secretary, Home Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai, respondent No. 2 is the Minister for Department of Home, Mantralaya, Mumbai, respondent No. 3 is the Commissioner of Police, Aurangabad and respondent No. 4 is the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Aurangabad.
4. It is the case of the petitioner that, the petitioner is the trust, which came to be registered under the provisions of Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 on 22-03-2010 with aim and object to open Social Club for amusement of its members. The said trust came to be registered with seven members in its Managing Body and there are about 500 members of the petitioner trust as on today. The petitioner trust made an application with the Commissioner of Police, Aurangabad on 07122009 for grant of Premises Licence for starting Social Club for amusement of its members. It was stated in the said application that, Games like Carom, playing cards etc., will be played in the social club for amusement of its members. The petitioner has placed on record the copy of the said application at Exhibit-A of the compilation of the writ petition. In reply to the application filed by the petitioner, respondent No. 3 by his letter dated 06-01-2010 directed the petitioner to submit documents as mentioned in the said letter. The petitioner by its forwarding/covering letter dated 04-06-2010 submitted Registration Certificate, Shop Act Licence, Certificate issued by the Health Department, No objection certificate issued by the Electrical Inspector and No objection certificate issued by the Fire Brigade to the respondent No.3. The petitioner alongwith writ petition has annexed copies of the letter issued by respondent No. 3 dated 06-01-2010 and copy of letter dated 04-06-2010 written by the petitioner to respondent No. 3 alongwith the copies of necessary documents which were submitted to respondent No. 3. They are placed at Exhibit-B collectively.
It is further case of the petitioner that, in spite of submitting all documents as directed by respondent No. 3, no further action was taken by respondent No. 3, therefore, again on 18-08-2010 the petitioner made application to respondent No. 3 informing that, he has complied with all the necessary documents and as per relevant rules, it is necessary to take decision by respondent No. 3 within 60 days and if the decision is not taken, in that case, there is deeming provision that, premises licence is deemed to have been granted in favour of the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner informed respondent No. 3 that, in view of deeming provision, he is starting said social club/card room. The petitioner has placed on record the copy of the application dated 18-08-2010 submitted by the petitioner to respondent No. 3 at Exhibit-C.
5. It is further case of the petitioner that, though the petitioner complied with all the necessary documents and formalities as asked by the respondent No.3 by letter dated 04-06-2010, no further action was taken by respondent No. 3. After about more than four months, respondent No. 3 passed the order dated 18-10-2010 informing that, the application of
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
