' MUHAMMAD NAWAZ BHATTI, J.---Brief facts leading to this writ petition are that the petitioner is a proprietor of Naz Theatre, Mailsi. He moved an application to the Home Department for grant of licence under section 10 of the Dramatic Performance Act, 1876. The Home Department sought N.O.C. From the D.C.O., Vehari In respect of the suitability and also NOC to the said proposal. The D.C.O. Vide his letter dated 6-3-2004 intimated the Home Department in the following terms:-- "It is intimated that annual of Naz Open Air Cinema Mai I has been renewed up to 30-9-200 , on the basis of Site Inspection Reports of District Officer (Building), Vehari, Electric Inspector Multan Region, Multan and District Officer (Civil Defence), Vehari. This office has no objection for the grant of licence under section 10 of the Dramatic Performance Act, 1876."
' The D.C.O., Vehari vide his letter dated 6-1-2004 addressed the Section Officer (Special-II) Home Department, Government of the Punjab reiterated that he had no objection to the registration of cinema building for theatrical performance after completing codal formalities. The Home Department, Government of the Punjab , vide its letter dated 9-2-2004 directed respondent No,3 D.C.O., Vehari to continue giving provisional permission for specific stage/dramas/plays etc., after obtaining scripts and fulfilling other requisite formalities/procedure laid down in the notification dated 17-11-2003. After completing codal formaintes and approval from Multan Arts Council of the scripts on the basis of recommendation of the Censor Rehearsal Committee, the D.C.O. Vide its endorsement dated 2-10-2004 granted permission to display the drama in the said Naz Theatre.
After the permission granted by the DCO, the petitioner was doing his business within the four corners of law but respondents Nos.6 and 7 at the behest of the rivals of the petitioner were trying to interfere into that business. Thereafter, he instituted Writ Petition No,5911 of 2004 which was disposed of with the direction that respondents Nos.6 and 7 would remain within the bounds of law and would not interfere into a lawful business, if being conducted by the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner started his business in a lawful manner for quite some time but the same situation has new allegedly arisen, due to which he has filed this writ petition praying that respondents Nos.3 to 8 may be directed not to interfere in the business of the petitioner in staging drama-play etc: on the basis of licence issued by Home Department and after having obtained approved script from Multan Arts Council.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner while referring to the Notification dated 17-11-2003 issued by the Home Department Government of the Punjab, which provides that "the District Coordination Officers concerned will be responsible for monitoring of the dramatic performance within their respective districts and will ensure that the vulgar/obscene stage performance are strictly monitored and in case of any violation sent report to the Provincial Government (Home Department) for any punitive action against delinquents under Dramatic Performance Act, 1876" has contended that respondent No,3 D.C.O. Vehari is exercising powers of the Home Department through his agency headed by the D.0 .0.(R.) who is exercising his power under the guise of Censor Rehearsal Committee; that at no stage the District Management recommended case against the petitioner for punitive action to the Home Department; that according to the administrative instructions issued by the Government of Punjab, Home Department, mentioned in the Notification No,13-2/HSPL-11/2003, dated 29-6-2004, the D.C.O. And D.P.O. May not take any action against the theatre by intercepting the performance and in this behalf relevant para (iv) of the said notification is reproduced below:-- "The D.C.Os./D,P.Os. Will not take any action against theatres by intercepting the performance. In case of any complaint of violation of the terms of the N.O.C., they shall immediately forward the monitoring reports to the Home Department for punitive action under section 3 of Dramatic Performance Act, 1876, as envisaged in Home Department's circular letter of even number dated 7th April, 2004".
' In the present case, till today no complaint under section 3 of the Dramatic Performance Act, 1876, was ever sent either by the local police or by the District Police Officer and this conspicuous silence on the part of the respondents shows that nothing wrong has been found in the petitioner's theatre; that the petitioner has political rivalry with Muhammad Mumtaz Khan Khichi Zila Nazim, who is also related to him and the D.C.O. Respondent No,3 and his subordinate officers at his instance are behaving in bad faith; that the respondents are creating hurdles in operation of the theatre and under the guise of visual inspection at each occasion they raise the objection that the drama being stage is not conformity with the script approved; that under Article 18 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, every citizen can run the lawful business and the petitioner is doing his business under the licensing system issued by the Government of the Punjab, Home Department, and the respondents have no jurisdiction to interfere with the same and that he shall be satisfied if a direction is issued to respondent No,3 D.C.O., Vehari to act upon the Notification dated 17-11-2003 issued by the Home Department, Government of the Punjab and especially adopt the procedure mentioned above.
3. On the other hand, the learned A.A.-G. Had vehemently opposed the writ petition and has supported the comments submitted by respondent No,3 D.C.O., Vehari. However, he agrees with the request of learned counsel for the petitioner that a direction may be issued to respondent No,3 D.C.O., Vehari to act upon the Notification dated 17-11-2003 issued by the Home Department Government of Punjab.
4. Respondents Nos.6 and 7 are also present in Court. They undertake that they will not interfere in the lawful business of the petitioner.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.A.-G. And perused the record.
6. Perusal of the comments submitted by respondent No,3 D.C.O., Vehari reveals that the District Censor Rehearsal Committee watched the final Rehearsal on 1-1-2004 and N.O.C. was accordingly issued on 2-10-2004. In the past the petitioner had been crossing the limits of vulgarity and obscenity. The District Censor Rehearsal Committee after watching the Censor Rehearsal on 29-4- 2005 rightly observed that performance did not follow the script and further recommended not to issue the N.O.C. Till Rehearsal is close to the script.
7. Anyhow without touching the merits of the case, I am inclined to accept the request of learned counsel for the petitioner mentioned in para.2 above and direct respondent No,3 D.C.O., Vehari to act upon the notification dated 17-11-2003 issued by the Home Department, Government of the Punjab and especially adopt the following Standard Operating Procedure (SOP): "The District Co- ordination Officers will be solely responsible for the monitoring of dramatic performance within their respective districts and will ensure that the vulgar/obscene stage performance are strictly monitored and in case of any violation send report to the Provincial Government (Home Department) for any punitive action against delinquents under Dramatic Performance Act, 1876)".
' I also direct the petitioner to abide by the said notification.
8. With these observations, the petition stand disposed of.