Cinema seating capacity reduction must first be considered by the licensing authority, not refused on revenue concerns or prior enhancement.

Where a statute permits reduction of cinema seating capacity subject to prior approval of a superior authority, the initial request must be made to the licensing authority that granted the licence and fixed the capacity. The superior authority's approval operates at a later stage if the licensing authority is otherwise inclined to allow the reduction. Earlier enhancement of seating capacity at the licensee's request does not create a statutory bar to a later reduction application, and anticipated loss of revenue is not, by itself, a valid ground to refuse the statutory remedy. The rejection was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh consideration by the licensing authority.

---

---

Issues: Whether an application for reduction of seating capacity in a cinema house lies in the first instance before the District Magistrate as the licensing authority under the statutory scheme, and whether rejection of such application on the grounds of earlier enhancement at the licensee's instance and likely loss of revenue is sustainable.

Analysis: The statutory provision governing reduction of seating capacity contemplates that the licensing authority, which grants the licence and fixes seating capacity, is the proper authority to receive the request at the first instance. The requirement of prior approval of the Commissioner indicates that the Commissioner's role is supervisory and arises only after the licensing authority is inclined to allow the reduction. The mere fact that the seating capacity was earlier enhanced at the licensee's request does not create a statutory bar to a later application for reduction. Likewise, anticipated loss of revenue is not a valid ground to refuse relief, because reduction of seating capacity necessarily affects revenue and that consequence cannot by itself defeat the statutory remedy.

Conclusion: The application before the District Magistrate was maintainable, and the rejection order could not be sustained on either ground.

Final Conclusion: The impugned rejection was set aside and the matter was sent back for fresh consideration by the licensing authority, with interim protection continuing in the meantime.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute permits reduction of seating capacity with prior approval of a superior authority, the initial request lies before the licensing authority, and refusal cannot rest on non-statutory considerations such as earlier enhancement at the applicant's instance or expected loss of revenue.

---