https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273273 A statutory licensing authority for a cinematograph theatre could not be treated as having unfettered discretion under Rule 5(2) of the Bombay Cinema Rules, 1954. The text states that the State Government's control remained subject to the statutory scheme, which contemplated municipal sanction, plan approval and even conversion of an existing building into a cinema; refusal based solely on prior construction was inconsistent with that framework. It further states that rejection of the application and the appellate order were vitiated because the authorities acted on an incorrect factual assumption and failed to apply their mind or give reasons in the exercise of quasi-judicial power. The resulting legal principle is that statutory licensing discretion must be exercised on relevant considerations and cannot be arbitrary. en-us Thu, 10 Sep 1970 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 14 Jun 2018 11:44:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273273 A statutory licensing authority for a cinematograph theatre could not be treated as having unfettered discretion under Rule 5(2) of the Bombay Cinema Rules, 1954. The text states that the State Government's control remained subject to the statutory scheme, which contemplated municipal sanction, plan approval and even conversion of an existing building into a cinema; refusal based solely on prior construction was inconsistent with that framework. It further states that rejection of the application and the appellate order were vitiated because the authorities acted on an incorrect factual assumption and failed to apply their mind or give reasons in the exercise of quasi-judicial power. The resulting legal principle is that statutory licensing discretion must be exercised on relevant considerations and cannot be arbitrary. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 10 Sep 1970 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273273