Allowed

Sanjeevini Recreation Club v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC11 Jul 2023WP/104088/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition filed by a recreation club against the District Registrar for refusing registration. The Court quashed the order requiring the club to obtain a license under the Karnataka Police Act or Public Amusement Order for indoor games and directed registration pending lawful inspection.

What did the court decide?

Impugned communication quashed; petition allowed; direction to respondent No.5 to register the club without insisting on license; respondents at liberty to inspect for unlawful activities.

Sanjeevini Recreation Club Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC-D:7017 WP No. 104088 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF JULY, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO. 104088 OF 2023 (GM-POLICE)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SANJEEVINI RECREATION CLUB, BANAHATTI-587 311, TQ: RABAKAVI-BANAHATTI, DIST: BAGALKOTE, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, ALTAF S/O. JAKKAR TAMBOLI, AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: SECRETATRY/ AGRICULTURE, R/O: TERADAL-587 315, TQ: RABAKAVI-BANAHATTI, DIST: BAGALKOTE.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI PRASHANT S. KADADEVAR, ADVOCATE)

¶10

VIJAYALAKSHMI M KANKUPPI Digitally signed by VIJAYALAKSHMI MKANKUPPI Location: High Court of Karnataka,Dharwad

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-01.

¶13

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BAGALKOTE-587 101, DIST: BAGALKOTE.

¶14

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE BAGALKOTE-587 101,

¶15

¶16

NC: 2023:KHC-D:7017 WP No. 104088 of 2023

¶17

DIST: BAGALKOTE.

¶18

THE POLICE INSPECTOR BANAHATTI TOWN POLICE STATION, RABAKAVI-BANAHATTI-587 311, DIST: BAGALKOTE.

¶19

THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES AND DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, BAGALKOTE-587 101, DIST: BAGALKOTE.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI RAMESH B. CHIGARI, HCGP)

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS, OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS NOT TO INSIST UPON THE PETITIONER TO OBTAIN LICENCE FOR THE PLAY OF CAROM, CHESS, RUMMY ETC. IN ITS PREMISES EITHER UNDER THE KARNATAKA POLICE ACT OR UNDER THE LICENSING AND CONTROLLING OF THE PLACE OF PUBLIC AMUSEMENT ORDER IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY; ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS, OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.5 TO REGISTER THE PETITIONER'S CLUB WITHOUT INSISTING ANY APPROVAL FROM THE 3^RD RESPONDENT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY; ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION QUASHING THE IMPUGNED COMMUNICATION DATE. 02.06.2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-D ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.5, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶23

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

¶24

- 3 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:7017 WP No. 104088 of 2023

¶25

ORDER

¶26

Heard learned counsel Shri Prashant S.Kadadevar,

¶27

for the petitioner and learned HCGP for respondents.

¶28

This petition is filed by the petitioner being

¶29

aggrieved by impugned communication vide Annexure-D issued by respondent No.5 dated 02.06.2023.

¶30

Petitioner is seeking to register the recreation club and sought for permission to register the club before respondent No.5. The main activities involved in the recreation club are indoor and outdoor games, all scientific, social, cultural activities to conduct sports meets and entertainment to its members. The petitioner submitted application for registration of the club complying with all the requirements as contemplated in law. Instead of registering the club on the basis of the documents produced and as per law, a communication is issued dated 02.06.2023 by respondent No.5 to secure approval and necessary permission/license from respondent No.1 for playing games on the ground that it is a skill game of

¶31

4 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:7017 WP No. 104088 of 2023

¶32

chance. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to obtain licence under the Karnataka Police Act as well as under the Licensing and Controlling of Places of Public Amusement Order (Bengalore City 2002). On these grounds, respondent No.5 has not registered the club of petitioner. Aggrieved by which, petitioner is before this Court.

¶33

It is the contention of learned counsel for the

¶34

petitioner that once petitioner complied with the necessary requirements as contemplated in law with regard to registration of the club, respondent No.5 is duty bound to register the club and if there is any violation of the same for non securing of any license, the same could be done. But before any such violation is found out, respondent No.5 cannot insist on securing license when such games are not played or proposed to be played in the club, and no license is required to any such games proposed to be played in the club.

¶35

Petitioner admittedly is a recreation club seeking to provide entertainment and sports activities to

¶36

5 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:7017 WP No. 104088 of 2023

¶37

its members in specific and therefore, he has filed an application for registration of the club with respondent No.5. It is the duty of respondent No.5 to consider the application based on the documents submitted and issue necessary registration certificate or reject it for non compliance of mandatory requirements.

¶38

In the present case, it is the contention of petitioner that respondent No.5 is insisting upon the petitioner to obtain license from respondent No.1 under

¶39

the Karnataka Police Act or under the Licensing and Controlling of Places of Public Amusement Order (Bengalore City 2002), which is not applicable to the petitioner on hand. For the purpose of recreation club, the licenses are not required unless as satisfied in the Karnataka Police Act and the Licensing and Controlling of Places of Public Amusement Order (Bengalore City 2002). Respondent No.5 is to consider the application on the basis of representation made by petitioner for registration. When the petitioner is inclined to run recreation club for

¶40

6 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:7017 WP No. 104088 of 2023

¶41

recreational activities of its members including games, sports and other lawful activities, which does not warrant securing license the petitioner is not required to secure a license under the Police Act.

¶42

Therefore, the question of insisting on the petitioner to obtain a license for these activities which does not contemplate securing license would not arise for consideration. Nevertheless, respondent Nos.1 to 4 would be at liberty to inspect and verify after registration and create a mechanism for inspection of the premises in any unlawful, illegal activities are conducted in the petitioner club. Under these circumstances, the petition could be disposed of by directing respondent No.5 to consider the application of the petitioner for registration of the club without insisting upon any 'No objection' or license from respondent Nos.1 to 4. It is relevant to note that this Court in the case of Sanna Adike Belegarara

¶43

Recreation Association and Others Vs State of Karnataka and Others reported in (2000) ILR (Kar)

¶44

7 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:7017 WP No. 104088 of 2023

¶45

4822 has a decided similar matter, wherein similar issue came up before the Court and petitions were disposed of with the following directions.

¶46

" At the same time, it is made clear that the police authorities concerned should not take law into their own hands and harass even genuine clubs carrying on bona fide activities by organising frequent raids. While surveillance and checks cannot be ruled out, the endeavor should be only to ensure that unlawful activities amounting to offences are not carried on in the guise of running recreational clubs or associations".

¶47

Hence, in view of the above discussions, I proceed to pass the following:

¶48

ORDER

¶49

i) Writ petition is allowed.

¶50

ii) The impugned communication dated 02.06.2023 issued by respondent No.5 is

¶51

quashed. Writ of mandamus is issued with a direction to respondent No.5 not to insist upon

¶52

¶53

NC: 2023:KHC-D:7017 WP No. 104088 of 2023

¶54

the petitioner to obtain license for playing carom, chess and etc., in its premises under the Karnataka Police Act or under the Licensing and Controlling of Places of Public Amusement Order (Bengalore City 2002).

¶55

iii) Respondent No.5 shall consider the application for registration of the petitioner in accordance with law.

¶56

iv) However, it is made clear that respondent

¶57

Nos.1 to 4 are at liberty to take suitable actions if any unlawful, illegal activities are conducted in the club in accordance with law.

¶58

Sd/JUDGE

¶59

AM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22

Sanjeevini Recreation Club v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjeevini Recreation Club v. the State 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

Siddanagouda S/O Nagangouda Patil Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Fakiravva D/O. Basappa Banappanavar Vs Smt. Paratevva D/O. Basappa Banappanavar

Sri Betadappa Vs Smt Shankarawwa

Padma W/O Laxmi Narayan Nagaukatte Vs Girish Shridhar Shetti

Jude S/O George Fernandes Vs Martin George Fernandes

Smt Shivubai W/O Bhimappa Kalloli Vs Smt Sanvakka W/O Murari Aliyas Murigeppa Magadum