Disposed

Maakalamma Recreation and Sports Club v. Government of Karnataka

Karnataka HC9 Apr 2013WP/16241/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner club sought direction for respondents not to interfere with lawful activities or demand licenses for skill games. Court ordered no interference with lawful activities while reserving right for action against unlawful acts.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed not to interfere with lawful recreational activities; liberty taken to act against unlawful activities.

Maakalamma Recreation and Sports Club Vs Government… — Service and Employment | Karnataka HC (2013)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

¶3

DATED THIS THE 9^th DAY OF APRIL, 2013

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.ABDUL NAZEER

¶6

WRIT PETITION No.16241 OF 2013 (GM-POLICE)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

MAAKALAMMA RECREATION AND SPORTS CLUB, SURVEY NO.122, ARATHI UKKADA ROAD, ACCHAPPANA KOPPALU, SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT 571 434 REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, SRI HEMANTH KUMAR.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

(By SRI M.K.KEMPE GOWDA, ADV.)

¶11

AND:

¶12

1 GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA HOME DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE 560 001 REP. BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶13

2 SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE MANDYA DISTRICT MANDYA – 571 434

¶14

3 DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, SRIRANGAPATNA, MANDYA DISTRICT – 571 434

¶15

4 CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE SRIRANGAPATNA, MANDYA DISTRICT 571 434

¶16

5 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE SRIRANGAPATNA, MANDYA DISTRICT – 571 434. ...RESPONDENTS

¶17

(By SRI R.B.SATHYANARAYANA SINGH, HCGP)

¶18

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS NOT TO INSIST UPO THE PETITIONER TO OBTAIN THE LICENSE TO CARRY ON THE LAWFUL ACTIVITIES IN THE PREMISES OF THE PETITIONER'S CLUB EITHER UNDER POLICE ACT OR UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF LICENSING & CONTROLLING OF PLACE OF PUBLIC AMUSEMENT ORDER AND NOT TO INTERFERENCE IN CARRYING OUT LAWFUL ACTIVITIES SUCH AS CHESS RUMMY, VOLLEY BALL, BALL BADMINTON, FOOT BALL, CAROM, TABLE TENNIS ETC.

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

Learned HCGP is directed to take notice for the respondents.

¶23

In this case, the petitioner has sought for an order directing the respondents not to insist upon it to obtain license to carry on lawful activities in its premises either under the Police Act, or under the Provisions of Licensing and Controlling of Places of Public Amusement Order and not to interfere in the play of skill oriented games like Rummy, Poker, Chess and Carrom, Coin Games, Wall Ball skill and other skill games and etc.

¶24

The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that no activity necessitating obtaining of license under the Licensing Order is carried on in the

¶25

¶26

premises of the petitioner; that the activity of playing the games of Dart, Chess, Rummy, Snooker/Billiards and Carrom etc., are not in the nature of gambling activity or game of chance; that such games are not prohibited or regulated. Moreover, the place of the petitioner is not a public place and the entry is restricted only to the members of the petitioner-association and not to outsiders and accordingly there is no requirement on the part of the petitioner to obtain a license as contemplated under Clause-3 of the Licensing Order. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on an earlier decision of this Court rendered in WP No.11843 of 2006, decided on 9.11.2006 (between M/s.Shiva Association vs. State of Karnataka & others) and submits that on similar terms this petition may also be disposed of.

¶27

Learned HCGP appearing for the respondents submits that the Police have not interfered and will not interfere with the lawful activities of the petitioner and they would take action only if the petitioner indulges in any unlawful activities. He further submits that the respondents will not insist the petitioner for license for such of the activities for which no license is required.

¶28

¶29

I have carefully considered the arguments made by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials placed on record. The only complaint of the petitioner is that the respondents are interfering with the lawful activities carried on by it. Learned HCGP has denied the allegations made in the writ petition. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the respondents should not interfere with the lawful activities of the petitioner. At the same time, respondents should be permitted to take action according to law in case the petitioner indulges in any unlawful activity. On identical facts, this Court in Shiva’s case (supra) has restrained the respondents from interfering with the lawful activities of the petitioner.

¶30

In the light of the above discussion, I pass the following order:-

¶31

a) The respondents are directed not to interfere with the lawful recreational activities carried on by the members of the petitioner-Association.

¶32

b) It is made clear that the respondents are at

¶33

¶34

liberty to take any appropriate action according to law, if the petitioner indulges in any unlawful activity.

¶35

The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.

¶36

Sd/JUDGE

¶37

KLY/

Maakalamma Recreation and Sports Club v. Government of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maakalamma Recreation and Sports Club v. Government of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K N Dinesh Vs the State of Karnataka

Sudha M Vs the Station House Officer

Sri L. Kishore Kumar Vs Smt Sumana Kishore

Sri Vinayaka Education Society (R) Vs the State of Karnataka

Ms. Martha Irena Jakimowici Vs Foreigners Regional Registration Officer

The Horticulture Officials Recreation Association Vs the State of Karnataka