The court emphasized the necessity of strict compliance with the Kerala Cinemas (Regulation) Act and Rules before granting construction permits for cinema halls.

JUDGMENT

WP(C) No. 12094/2024 challenges the construction of a cinema hall by the 8^th respondent. WP(C) No. 18795/2024 also challenges the same construction.

2. The petitioners allege that the proposed cinema hall construction is in violation of the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules , 2019 (for short, 'the KPBR '), the Kerala Cinemas (Regulation) Act , 1958 (for short, 'the Cinemas Act'), the Kerala Cinemas (Regulation) Rules , 1988 (for short, 'the Cinemas Rules') and the Byelaws for construction of cinema buildings (IS: 4878 - 1968). Alleging that despite their complaints made before the Panchayat, a permit was granted in total violation of the above provisions, these writ petitions are filed.

3. The petitioners would submit that, as the construction of the cinema hall is regulated by the Kerala Cinemas (Regulation) Act , the Kerala Cinemas (Regulation) Rules and the IS Byelaws (which are prescribed by the Bureau of Indian Standards) and in view of Rule 44(7) of the KPBR which states that, in the case of Cinema theatres, the location, size and building construction shall be in compliance with the provisions in the Cinemas Act and Rules read with IS: 4878- 1968 Byelaws for construction of cinema buildings. It is also their argument that the will prevail only for areas not covered by the Cinemas Act and Rules and the Byelaws as aforesaid. It is stated that the application for a permit for the construction of a cinema hall is to be filed in terms of Section 6 read with Rule 4 of the Cinemas Act and Rules. Section 5 categorically lays down the guidelines and factors that are to be taken into account while granting or refusing a permit. As per Rule 4, the application for permission to construct a cinema theatre is to be made in Form 'A' and shall be accompanied by various designs or plans to identify the compliance of requirements to ensure the safety of viewers.

4. Upon receiving the application for permission, the authority under the Cinemas Act is bound to forward the same to various authorities such as the Executive Engineer, the Chief Electrical Inspector, the Town Planner, the Chief Medical Officer as well as the Officer of Fire & Safety for their reports and only after the scrutiny of these authorities that a permit can be granted by the local authority. There is an added condition that requires the applicant to give notice in writing to the Executive Engineer, PWD, as well as the Chief Electrical Inspector one month prior to the commencement of construction so that the officers can inspect the progress of construction. Upon completion of construction, the applicant should then make available certificates from the officials of various departments and submit the same to the authority empowered under the Act and apply for a licence to use the theatre for films. Thus, contending that there is a wholesale violation of the above provisions, the petitioners seek to quash the permission granted for the construction.

5. Respondents 1 and 2 contend that the IS Byelaws are only guidelines meant for general application and have no statutory backing. It is also submitted that the permit can be granted following the provisions of the KPBR . It is also their submission that the byelaws have become outdated by the passage of time and technology.

6. The respondent, who is putting up the construction, has also filed a counter justifying the grant of permit and submitted that she has started the construction only based on the permit granted. The respondent further submits that she is carrying out the construction in compliance with all statutory requirements and that a building permit was issued on 6.12.2021 through permit No. A3-BA (306073)/2021, after carrying out a proper inspection in compliance with the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules 2019 and the Kerala Cinemas (Regulation) Rules , 1988. The averment that the building will not have any parking facility and waste management and rainwater harvesting was denied. The total built-up area