Find a Lawyer

Writ Petition No. 1049 of 1981, decided on 16th May, 1981,

‑‑S. 13 (4) and Cinematograph Rules‑Cinema licence, renewal of Renewal of licence refused on ground of petitioner not being member of Pakistan Films Exhibitors Association‑Held, restrictions contained in S. 13 (4) apply to issue of licence and not to renewal of licence‑Direction issued to that effect by Provincial Government without amending rules, held further. without lawful authority.

S. M. Almas AU for Petitioner.

K.N. Bhindhari, A. A.‑G. for Respondents.

Date of hearing : 16th May, 1981.

The petitioner who is a Managing Director of Novelty Cinema, Faisalabad, challenges the order dated 28th June. 1979 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Faisalabad rejecting his application for renewal of annual licence.

2. Briefly, the facts of this case are that on 27th February, 1979, a Notification was issued by the Ministry of Commerce, Federal Government. under section 13 (1) (b) of the Trade Organizations Ordinance, 1961 (XLV of 1961) that all persons, firms. companies or concerns engaged in the exhibition of films by means of Cinematograph shall be the members of the Pakistan Films Exhibitors Association. The Pakistan Films Exhibitors Association (hereinafter called P.F.E.A) also issued a letter dated 29th May, 1979, to various Proprietors, Managing Directors, Managers, Partners/ Lessees asking them to become members and pay annual subscription, etc. P.F.E A. wrote another circular letter to all the Deputy Commissioners, requesting that unless a certificate of membership of P.F.E.A. is produced, no cinema .licence be renewed. A copy of this letter was endorsed to the petitioner by the Deputy Commissioner, Faisalabad on 28th June, 1979, also.

3. On 7th July, 1979, the Government of Pakistan in Culture and Sports Affairs Division, wrote a letter to all the Chief Secretaries of the Government requesting to make the following provision in the Cinemato graph Rules :‑

"Cinema licence shall be issued or renewed or transferred subject to the production of a valid membership certificate from the Pakistan Exhibitors Association."

It is admitted by the parties that no such amendment has been brought about in the Rules. The petitioner also objected to the above letter.

4. On 8th January, 1980 the Secretary, Government of the Punjab in the Information Department, wrote a letter to all the District Magistrates in the Punjab, directing to ensure that in compliance of Federal Govern ment orders all persons, firms, companies or concerns engaged in the exhibition of films by means of Cinematograph shall be the members of the Pakistan Films Exhibitors Association and no permission may be issued, licence renewed or exhibition allowed to any person, firm, company or concern engaged in the exhibition of films by means of Cinematograph without the production of the membership certificate of the Pakistan Films Exhibitors Association, Lahore.

5. As the petitioner's licence expired on 12th January,. 1981 he applied for its renewal. He also sent a legal notice to the Deputy Com missioner, saying that the above directions of the Provincial Government were unlawful. A letter is said to have been sent to the Secretary also.

The Deputy Commissioner, however, rejected his application for renewal on 19th March, 1981, as said above.

6. It is contended by the learned counsel that as sections 13 and 14 of the Motion Pictures Ordinance, 1979 do not place any such restriction on the renewal of the licence, the orders issued by the Provincial Govern ment to the Deputy Commissioner are without lawful authority and of no legal effect. The learned Assistant Advocate‑General also relied on the same provisions and laid particular stress on section 13 (4) which reads as under :‑

"Subject to the foregoing provisions of this section, the licensing authority may grant a licence under this chapter to such applicant as it deems fit and on such terms and conditions and subject to such restrictions as it may determine."

It will be seen that the conditions and restrictions as contained in section 13 (4) are to apply only to a licence, that means a licence has to be issued with certain conditions or 'restrictions. It, however, does not empower the Deputy Commissioner to refuse to renew a licence on the ground that no certificate has been obtained by the P.F.E.A.

7. In any case, the conditions or restrictions are to be in accordance with the purpose of the Act and the Ordinance and cannot be just arbitrary or extraneous. It appears that the Deputy Commissioner would have been able to refuse to renew a licence only if the amendment sought for in the Rules had been made. The direction issued by the Provincial Government without amending the Rules and without there being any support in the relevant law, is not with lawful authority.

In view of the above, the impugned refusal by the Deputy Commission er on the ground that the petitioner was not a member of P.F.E.A., is without lawful authority and of no legal effect. The Deputy Commissioner shall, therefore, reconsider the application of the petitioner and pass an order in accordance with law and in the light of what has been said above.

The partie shall bear their own costs.

Petition accepted.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.