Dvv Entertainments vs. Barla Mallesh Yadav

Facts

The appellant, DW Entertainments, a film producer, sought permission to charge higher ticket rates for its film 'OG' than prescribed by G.O.Ms.No.No.120, dated 21.12.2021. The State Government, via memo dated 19.09.2025, granted exemption under Section 12 of the Telangana Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1955, allowing enhanced ticket rates from 24.09.2025 to 04.10.2025. The film was released on 21.09.2025. The respondent No.1, a cine-goer, filed a writ petition challenging this memo. The learned Single Judge, by an order dated 24.09.2025, suspended the memo without issuing notice or hearing the appellant, and listed the writ petition for hearing on 09.10.2025. The appellant filed this Writ Appeal against the Single Judge's order.

Held

The Court held that the validity of the memo dated 19.09.2025, granting exemption under Section 12 of the Act, was only until 04.10.2025. The learned Single Judge had suspended this memo by an order dated 24.09.2025 and listed the writ petition for hearing on 09.10.2025. Given that 26.09.2025 was the last working day before the Dussehra vacation, and if the writ petition were heard after 04.10.2025, the purpose of the writ petition would be achieved. Therefore, the Court found that ends of justice would be met by remanding the matter to the learned Single Judge to hear the writ petition on 26.09.2025. The Court also noted that the impugned order dated 24.09.2025, suspending the memo without hearing the appellant, was kept in abeyance until the learned Single Judge passed appropriate orders on 26.09.2025. The Court requested the learned Single Judge to pass orders in accordance with law without being influenced by any observations made by the appellate court.

Key Issues

1. Whether the learned Single Judge erred in suspending the memo dated 19.09.2025, which granted exemption under Section 12 of the Telangana Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1955, without issuing notice and hearing the appellant, thereby virtually allowing the writ petition at the admission stage? 2. Whether the interim order suspending the memo, dated 19.09.2025, which was valid only until 04.10.2025, would defeat the purpose of the exemption if the writ petition was listed for hearing on 09.10.2025? Contentions of the Appellant: The appellant argued that the Single Judge's ex parte interim order, suspending the memo without hearing the affected party, is unsustainable and amounts to allowing the writ petition at the admission stage, citing Supreme Court judgments in Raja Khan vs. Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Waqf Board and State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Sandeep Kumar Balmiki. They contended that the exemption was granted strictly in accordance with Section 12 of the Act and would benefit the State through enhanced GST collection. The appellant also pointed out that the exemption was time-bound until 04.10.2025, and listing the writ petition after this date would render the exemption moot. Contentions of Respondent No.1 (Writ Petitioner): Respondent No.1 argued that a Government Memo cannot nullify the State Government's policy enunciated in Government Orders. They contended that the memo dated 19.09.2025 lacked reasons for granting exemption under Section 12 of the Act, as it requires reasonable grounds to be established. Furthermore, they alleged selective granting of exemptions to certain producers, which was not extended to others, and that the enhanced ticket rates were detrimental to cine-goers.