THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR W.P. Nos. 33837, 35040 & 32304 of 2014 Date of Judgment: 25.11.2014 Between:
B. Asif Hussain and others …Petitioners And Government of Andhra Pradesh and others ..Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR W.P. Nos. 33837, 35040 & 32304 of 2014 COMMON ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
In all these three writ petitions relief sought for by the respective petitioners is similar and hence they are heard together and disposed of by this common order.
The reliefs claimed in the writ petitions are as follows, W.P. No. 32304 of 2014 “to issue writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in interfering with the exhibition of skill game of ball box, by the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Section 15 of A.P. Gaming Act, 1974 and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the exhibition of skill game of ball box by the petitioner in the exhibition at beside Kesavareddy School, Old Bypass road, Kadapa and pass such other order or orders may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”
W.P. No. 35040 of 2014 “to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents not to interfere with playing and exhibition of skill games viz., Ring through, Ball Box Dart through and steel games on the occasion of the festival of Sri Golingeswara Kumara Subrahmanyeswara Swamy Varla Shasti at Biccavole Village & Mandal, East Godavari District from 27-11-2014 to 03-12-2014 by declaring that they are all skill games under the provisions of A.P. Gaming Act, 1974 and consequently restrain the Respondents from interfering with the above said exhibition of games by the Petitioner during the said period and pass such other order or orders may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”
W.P. No. 33837 of 2014 “to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in interfering with the exhibition of the skill games such as (1) Ring Throw, (b) Ball Box, (c) Video games (d) Dart throw and (e) Steel games conducted by the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the skill games conducted by the petitioner and pass such other order or orders may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”
Respondent No.3 in W.P.No. 32304 of 2014 filed a counter-affidavit and also photographs along with instructions. It is stated that the said photographs are of ball box game and it is a game of chance and it is not a game of skill, as such it violates the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Gaming Act. Therefore, the respondents-police have objected to the conducting of such game by the petitioner. The permissions granted by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Kadapa and other competent authorities are only in the nature of general conditions and if there is violation of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Gaming Act, the respondents-police are bound to take action.
In W.P.No. 33837 of 2014 respondent No.4 filed a counter-affidavit wherein it is stated that games are propagated during festival days i.e., cart festivals, Jathara, Urus etc and the respondents-police have no objection for conducting skill games, but the petitioner was conducting Ball Box game which is a game of chance. It is further stated in para-5 of the counter-affidavit that the petitioner was conducting Ball Box game in the exhibition to attract the public to gain money from them and the nature of game is that there would be six colours viz., white, blue, black, red, green and yellow on a table and the public are required to bet money on any of the available colour by throwing a ball into the box and the said game is described by the respondents as a game of chance being played in the guise of skill game. Hence the action of the respondents in not permitting the petitioner to conduct ball box game is sought to be justified.
No counter-affidavit is filed In W.P.No. 35040 of 2014.
In support of the claims of the petitioners, their learned counsel cited earlier order of this Court in W.P.No. 14556 of 2007, dated 9.7.2007 wherein similar ball box game was permitted and the respondents-police were directed not to interfere with the legitimate business of the petitioner therein. I have seen the said judgment and it is evident therefrom that the learned Government Pleader for Home conceded the legal position and did not dispute the nature of the ball box game and on such concession, the said order was passed.
Another judgment of this Court in W.P.No. 16414 of 2003, dated 5.8.2005 is also relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioners, but the relief sought therein was not to interfere with the running of the skill games and though ball box game was one of the games mentioned by the petitioner therein, but the third respondent therein conceded that they were not interfering with the skill games conducted by the petitioner therein. In view of that, the said writ petition was also disposed of.
In the present case, however, counter-affidavits are filed by the respondents in W.P.Nos. 32304 and 33837 of 2014 and it is clear from the said counters that the respondents-police have examined the nature of the ball box game and are of the view that it is a game of chance and as such violative of the Andhra Pradesh Gaming Act. The present writ petitions, therefore, stand on a differing footing than the aforesaid cited writ petitions which were disposed of on concessions made on behalf of the respondents therein.
At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioners, however, states that excluding the ball box game, other skill games being not in controversy, there is no reason for the respondents not to allow the petitioners to conduct the said skill games. I find force in the said contention, as there appears no serious objection from the respondents in the counter-affidavits with respect to the said skill games.
In view of that, all these writ petitions are disposed of directing the respondents-police not to interfere with the skill games held and conducted by the petitioners, other than the ball box game. The respondents-police are also at liberty to examine and verify whether the petitioners are conducting the said skill games without violating the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Gaming Act.
Miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J Dt. 25.11.2014 NB:
CC of order be furnished as early as possible /BO/ KR