IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.2112 OF 2018

11^th February, 2026 Between:

Bigtree Entertainment Private Limited.

…Petitioner AND The State of Telangana and Others …Respondents

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed with the following relief:

“…to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in issuing the communication dated 20.07.2017 vide FDC/Sub/OTS/l/2017/894 and the consequential G.0 Rt. No. 2050 dated 26.09.2017 issued by the Respondents as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, without competence/ authority/ jurisdiction and contrary to the A.P Cinema (Regulations) Act, 1955 and the A.P Cinema (Regulations) Rules, 1970 and set aside the same and consequently direct the Respondents to not to interfere with the business of the Petitioner in conducting the online ticketing services and not to compel the Petitioners to enrol with their online ticketing portal and pass.......”

2. Heard Mr.S. Niranjan Reddy, senior counsel for the petitioner and Mr.D. Pradeep, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Mr.G. Veersa Swamy, learned Government Pleader for General Administration appearing for respondent Nos.3 and 4.

3. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the present writ petition has been filed challenging the legality and validity of the communication dated 20.07.2017 issued by the respondents and G.O.Rt. No. 2050 dated 26.09.2017, along with all consequential proceedings, wherein the online ticketing services have been proposed and compelling for enrolment with their online ticketing portal. The petitioner seeks setting aside of the said communication and Government Order, and further prays for a direction restraining the respondents from interfering with the lawful business activities of the petitioner.

4. During the course of hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submits that the Government Order in question, including the policy concerning the online ticketing system, is presently under reconsideration by the Government. It is brought to the notice of this Court that a Committee has been constituted to examine the issues arising out of G.O.Rt. No. 2050 dated 26.09.2017. Upon receipt of the Committee’s recommendations, the Government proposes to revisit the regulatory framework and take appropriate policy decisions, including framing or amending relevant rules and issuing consequential orders, if required.

5. Having regard to the above submission, it is evident that the Government has initiated a process of reconsideration of the impugned Government Order and that its continuance in its present form is under review. In view of this development, the principal grievance of the petitioner stands substantially addressed for the present.

6. Upon consideration of the submissions made and the well- settled legal principle that where the impugned action is under active reconsideration by the competent authority and no coercive steps are being taken pursuant thereto, the writ Court may decline to adjudicate the matter on merits, this Court is of the considered view that it would be appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by reserving the liberty to the petitioner to challenge any fresh or consequential action that may be taken and which may adversely affect his rights.

7. Accordingly, while recording the submission of the learned Assistant Government Pleader, this Court leaves it open to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedies in accordance with law in the event any subsequent order, rule, or action is passed pursuant to such reconsideration that prejudicially affects the petitioner’s business interests.

8. With the above observations and liberty, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

_________