https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287834 Section 5(2) of the Orissa Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1954 was upheld as a valid regulatory provision because the licensing discretion was confined by the Act's safety purpose, rule-making framework, State supervision and appellate review; it was therefore not uncontrolled, unguided or unconstitutional under Articles 19(1)(g), 19(6) or 14. The refusal to renew a temporary cinema licence was also upheld because the appellate authority acted on local inspection and the unsuitability of the site for a cinema house, not on irrelevant considerations or discrimination. The decision confirms that licensing for public safety and site suitability may validly differ between temporary and permanent premises. en-us Wed, 21 Oct 1959 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Nov 2020 12:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287834 Section 5(2) of the Orissa Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1954 was upheld as a valid regulatory provision because the licensing discretion was confined by the Act's safety purpose, rule-making framework, State supervision and appellate review; it was therefore not uncontrolled, unguided or unconstitutional under Articles 19(1)(g), 19(6) or 14. The refusal to renew a temporary cinema licence was also upheld because the appellate authority acted on local inspection and the unsuitability of the site for a cinema house, not on irrelevant considerations or discrimination. The decision confirms that licensing for public safety and site suitability may validly differ between temporary and permanent premises. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 21 Oct 1959 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287834