1. The petitioner is the brother of the owner of a multiplex cinema complex, within the jurisdiction of the 1st respondent. The operation of the three theaters in the complex commenced on 18.12.2014 and has been continued till now. The petitioner challenge the notice issued by the Secretary at Exhibit P15 and the authorization letter P20, which together resulted in the closing down of the cinema theaters.

2. The writ petition was filed day before yesterday and though this Court was inclined to grant an interim order, on the specific request made by the learned Counsel for the Municipality it was posted yesterday. A counter-affidavit was filed by the Municipality and considerable arguments were advanced by both sides. Due to paucity of time and also for reason of the Counsel seeking time for clarification; the matter was again posted today. Today after the matter was considerably heard, both Counsel requested that only an interim order be passed. However, this Court is of the opinion that there is no necessity to pass an interim order especially since pleadings are completed and the matter fully heard. Hence it was specifically informed to the Counsel that the writ petition