{"id":55191,"date":"2016-07-08T14:11:53","date_gmt":"2016-07-08T08:41:53","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=55191"},"modified":"2016-09-13T12:10:48","modified_gmt":"2016-09-13T06:40:48","slug":"consent-of-the-owner-of-the-premises-not-necessary-for-renewal-of-tenants-valid-licence-under-the-section-4923-of-the-kerala-municipality-act-1994","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/08\/consent-of-the-owner-of-the-premises-not-necessary-for-renewal-of-tenants-valid-licence-under-the-section-4923-of-the-kerala-municipality-act-1994\/","title":{"rendered":"Consent of the owner of the premises not necessary for renewal of tenant\u2019s valid licence under the Section 492(3) of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994"},"content":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court<\/strong>: The bench of V. Gopala Gowda and A.K. Goel, JJ, while deciding the question as to whether the consent of the owner of the premises is necessary for renewal of tenant\u2019s licence under the Section 492(3) of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994, held that the requirement of consent of landlord is applicable only when a person intends to obtain a licence for the first time. It was held that renewal or subsequent application for obtaining licence on expiry of the period of the existing licence, during the currency of the tenancy, is not applicable for obtaining licence. However, the Court clarified that even in the case of application for obtaining licence for the first time, the tenant cannot be deprived of running lawful business merely because the landlord withheld the consent as valid tenancy itself has implied authority of the landlord for legitimate use of the premises by the tenant.<\/p>\n

While interpreting the Section 492 (3) of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994, the Tribunal and the single bench of Kerala High Court had said that Under Section 492(3) of the Kerala Municipality Act, a consent of the owner is needed only for obtaining licence for the first time. Since the petitioner has not applied for licence for the first time the Corporation cannot impose a condition for obtaining a consent from the landlord. It was further held that The Corporation cannot insist upon such a tenant for production of a written consent from the landlord for the purpose of issuing of the licence. A statutory tenant can be evicted from the leased premises only in accordance with the various provisions contained in the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965.<\/p>\n

The Court, noting that since the possession of the tenant is lawful, the landlord is not entitled to withhold his consent for the conduct of the business for which the premises were given on rent, agreed with the abovementioned view and hence, set aside the order of the division bench of the High Court, thereby, restoring the order of the Tribunal as affirmed by the Single Bench of the High Court. [Sudhakaran v. Corp. of Trivandrum, 2016 SCC OnLine SC 666<\/a>, decided on 05.07.2016]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court: The bench of V. Gopala Gowda and A.K. Goel, JJ, while deciding the question as to whether the consent of <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":154914,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,9],"tags":[7871,7861,7851,5363],"class_list":["post-55191","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-supremecourt","tag-lease","tag-owner","tag-premises","tag-supreme-court"],"yoast_head":"\nConsent of the owner of the premises not necessary for renewal of tenant\u2019s valid licence under the Section 492(3) of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994 | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/08\/consent-of-the-owner-of-the-premises-not-necessary-for-renewal-of-tenants-valid-licence-under-the-section-4923-of-the-kerala-municipality-act-1994\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Consent of the owner of the premises not necessary for renewal of tenant\u2019s valid licence under the Section 492(3) of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Supreme Court: The bench of V. Gopala Gowda and A.K. Goel, JJ, while deciding the question as to whether the consent of\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/08\/consent-of-the-owner-of-the-premises-not-necessary-for-renewal-of-tenants-valid-licence-under-the-section-4923-of-the-kerala-municipality-act-1994\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2016-07-08T08:41:53+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-09-13T06:40:48+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Sucheta\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Sucheta\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/08\/consent-of-the-owner-of-the-premises-not-necessary-for-renewal-of-tenants-valid-licence-under-the-section-4923-of-the-kerala-municipality-act-1994\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/08\/consent-of-the-owner-of-the-premises-not-necessary-for-renewal-of-tenants-valid-licence-under-the-section-4923-of-the-kerala-municipality-act-1994\/\",\"name\":\"Consent of the owner of the premises not necessary for renewal of tenant\u2019s valid licence under the Section 492(3) of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/08\/consent-of-the-owner-of-the-premises-not-necessary-for-renewal-of-tenants-valid-licence-under-the-section-4923-of-the-kerala-municipality-act-1994\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/08\/consent-of-the-owner-of-the-premises-not-necessary-for-renewal-of-tenants-valid-licence-under-the-section-4923-of-the-kerala-municipality-act-1994\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2016-07-08T08:41:53+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-09-13T06:40:48+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/08\/consent-of-the-owner-of-the-premises-not-necessary-for-renewal-of-tenants-valid-licence-under-the-section-4923-of-the-kerala-municipality-act-1994\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/08\/consent-of-the-owner-of-the-premises-not-necessary-for-renewal-of-tenants-valid-licence-under-the-section-4923-of-the-kerala-municipality-act-1994\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/08\/consent-of-the-owner-of-the-premises-not-necessary-for-renewal-of-tenants-valid-licence-under-the-section-4923-of-the-kerala-municipality-act-1994\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/08\/consent-of-the-owner-of-the-premises-not-necessary-for-renewal-of-tenants-valid-licence-under-the-section-4923-of-the-kerala-municipality-act-1994\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Consent of the owner of the premises not necessary for renewal of tenant\u2019s valid licence under the Section 492(3) of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa\",\"name\":\"Sucheta\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Sucheta\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/legal_editor\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Consent of the owner of the premises not necessary for renewal of tenant\u2019s valid licence under the Section 492(3) of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994 | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/08\/consent-of-the-owner-of-the-premises-not-necessary-for-renewal-of-tenants-valid-licence-under-the-section-4923-of-the-kerala-municipality-act-1994\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Consent of the owner of the premises not necessary for renewal of tenant\u2019s valid licence under the Section 492(3) of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994","og_description":"Supreme Court: The bench of V. Gopala Gowda and A.K. Goel, JJ, while deciding the question as to whether the consent of","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/08\/consent-of-the-owner-of-the-premises-not-necessary-for-renewal-of-tenants-valid-licence-under-the-section-4923-of-the-kerala-municipality-act-1994\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2016-07-08T08:41:53+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-09-13T06:40:48+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Sucheta","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Sucheta","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/08\/consent-of-the-owner-of-the-premises-not-necessary-for-renewal-of-tenants-valid-licence-under-the-section-4923-of-the-kerala-municipality-act-1994\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/08\/consent-of-the-owner-of-the-premises-not-necessary-for-renewal-of-tenants-valid-licence-under-the-section-4923-of-the-kerala-municipality-act-1994\/","name":"Consent of the owner of the premises not necessary for renewal of tenant\u2019s valid licence under the Section 492(3) of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/08\/consent-of-the-owner-of-the-premises-not-necessary-for-renewal-of-tenants-valid-licence-under-the-section-4923-of-the-kerala-municipality-act-1994\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/08\/consent-of-the-owner-of-the-premises-not-necessary-for-renewal-of-tenants-valid-licence-under-the-section-4923-of-the-kerala-municipality-act-1994\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","datePublished":"2016-07-08T08:41:53+00:00","dateModified":"2016-09-13T06:40:48+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/08\/consent-of-the-owner-of-the-premises-not-necessary-for-renewal-of-tenants-valid-licence-under-the-section-4923-of-the-kerala-municipality-act-1994\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/08\/consent-of-the-owner-of-the-premises-not-necessary-for-renewal-of-tenants-valid-licence-under-the-section-4923-of-the-kerala-municipality-act-1994\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/08\/consent-of-the-owner-of-the-premises-not-necessary-for-renewal-of-tenants-valid-licence-under-the-section-4923-of-the-kerala-municipality-act-1994\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","width":1330,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/08\/consent-of-the-owner-of-the-premises-not-necessary-for-renewal-of-tenants-valid-licence-under-the-section-4923-of-the-kerala-municipality-act-1994\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Consent of the owner of the premises not necessary for renewal of tenant\u2019s valid licence under the Section 492(3) of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa","name":"Sucheta","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Sucheta"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/legal_editor\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":209773,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/02\/12\/ker-hc-requirement-of-landlords-consent-for-renewal-of-trade-licence-can-be-dispensed-when-relations-between-landlord-and-tenant-are-strained\/","url_meta":{"origin":55191,"position":0},"title":"Ker HC | Requirement of landlord\u2019s consent for renewal of trade licence can be dispensed when relations between landlord and tenant are strained","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"February 12, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Kerala High Court: The Division Bench of Hrishikesh Roy and A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar. JJ. dismissed a writ appeal filed by landlord against an order dispensing with the requirement of his consent, for renewal of his tenant\u2019s trade licence. A partnership firm (tenant) \u2013 Vijaya Jyothi Traders \u00ad\u2013 had filed an\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":206907,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/12\/17\/rejection-or-renewal-of-arms-licence-must-be-based-only-on-the-grounds-given-under-section-14-of-the-arms-act-1959-kerala-hc\/","url_meta":{"origin":55191,"position":1},"title":"Rejection or renewal of arms licence must be based only on the grounds given under Section 14 of the Arms Act, 1959: Kerala HC","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"December 17, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Kerala High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Anu Sivaraman, J. allowed a civil writ petition seeking quashing of an order whereby petitioner\u2019s application for renewal of arms licence was rejected. Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr K.R. Sunil submitted that the reason stated for rejection was that the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":217278,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/25\/kar-hc-trade-licence-is-necessary-for-storage-and-distribution-of-auto-lpg-since-the-said-business-activity-is-hazardous-and-likely-to-cause-nuisance\/","url_meta":{"origin":55191,"position":2},"title":"Kar HC | Trade licence is necessary for storage and distribution of \u2018Auto LPG\u2019 since said business activity is hazardous and likely to cause nuisance","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"July 25, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Karnataka High Court: S. Sunil Dutt Yadav, J. heard a writ petition which dealt with granting of trade licence on the basis of a NOC. The petitioner was a registered company engaged in the business of automobile, engineering and energy products. For storage of Auto LPG at the premises, NOC\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":244575,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/02\/27\/license\/","url_meta":{"origin":55191,"position":3},"title":"Licence and its revocation","author":"Editor","date":"February 27, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"by Achal Gupta\u2020","rel":"","context":"In "Op Eds"","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/License.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/License.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/License.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/License.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/License.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":212358,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/25\/ker-hc-renewal-of-pistol-gun-licence-allowed-where-applicant-acquitted-in-criminal-cases-pending-against-him\/","url_meta":{"origin":55191,"position":4},"title":"Ker HC | Renewal of pistol\/ gun licence allowed where applicant acquitted in criminal cases pending against him","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"March 25, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Kerala High Court: The Bench of N. Nagaresh, J. allowed a civil writ petition for renewal of gun licence on the ground that the applicant of licence had been exonerated in criminal cases pending against him. The instant petition was filed challenging Additional District Magistrate\u2019s (ADM) order of refusal to\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":304943,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/16\/dhc-upholds-asis-selection-procedure-for-obtaining-new-license-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":55191,"position":5},"title":"Delhi High Court upholds ASI\u2019s selection procedure for obtaining new licence to work as photographers in protected monuments","author":"Simranjeet","date":"October 16, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cPrimary aim of refresher course is to strengthen knowledge of old photographer in the light of advancement that has occurred in field of photography, equipment and related techniques, digital mode, etc. The refresher course is intended to upgrade all old school photographers and enhance their knowledge and skill, as digital\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delhi high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/55191","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=55191"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/55191\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/154914"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=55191"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=55191"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=55191"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}