1. HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C. J.--After the amendment of the West Pakistan Entertainment Duty Act, 1958 by Ordinances Nos. IX and XIX of 1969 providing for the classification of cinema houses into various categories for purposes of payment of entertainment duty and welfare cess the West Pakistan Entertainment Duty on Cinema Rules, 1969, set up a Special Classification Committee to classify the cinemas situated big towns including Lahore in accordance with the provisions of the amending Ordinances.
2. The Classification Committee duly called upon the petitioner-- cinema to appear before it on 8- 10-69 in connection with its classification. The Manager of the petitioner-cinema appeared before the Committee and explained his case in the light of the principles of rule 4 of the West Pakistan Entertainment Duty on Cinema Rules, 1969. Thereafter, on 26-9-69, some members of the Classification Committee also inspected the cinema at 11 a.m. Thereafter, the cinema - was classified by an order of the 16th of October 1969 as Class II (Second Class) cinema under the Act.
3. Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner filed a review before the Member, Board of Revenue (Excise and Taxation), Government of Punjab, claiming that the petitioner should have been classified as Class IV.
4. The petitioner was represented by a learned counsel before the Member, Board of Revenue, who heard the counsel fully, and by a detailed order setting out the contentions of the petitioner, as also of the representatives of the Excise and Taxation Department, came to the conclusion that the Special Classification Committee had found that the cinema was situated in an attractive locality for cinemagoers, was also showing good quality pictures and that "various factors enumerated in rule 4 of the West Pakistan Entertainment Duty on Cinema Rules, 1969 have been, in fact, operative to the advantage of this cinema."
5. The classification made by the Special Classification Committee was accordingly upheld.
6. Against this order, the petitioner went up on a further review to the Provincial Government. This was rejected on the 18th of January 1971 without giving any further hearing to the petitioner.
7. The petitioner sought to challenge this by a writ petition in the High Court but the same was dismissed in limine by a Division Bench on the 27th of September 1971.
8. The petitioner now seeks special leave to appeal and it is contended on its behalf that the failure of the Government to give it a further hearing in the second review representation filed by it has resulted in a grave failure of natural justice as it has been thereby prevented from pointing out the discrimination that had been made against the petitioner. We, however, see no substance in this contention, for, in the grounds given in the representation itself all these facts have been fully set out and it is, therefore, presumed that the Government while dealing with the question read the petition and its grounds. The petitioner cannot in such administrative proceedings expect to be heard at each stage. It was heard in full at two stages and was given adequate opportunity to meet the points raised by the department.
9. We are also not impressed by the argument that either the Classification Committee or the Member, Board of Revenue, proceeded on extraneous considerations. It is clear from the order of the Member, Board of Revenue, that the factors enumerated in rule 4 of the West Pakistan Entertainment Duty on Cinema Rules, 1369 had been taken into consideration. There is also nothing before us to show that the classification was not correct.
10. This petition is accordingly dismissed.