1. The petitioner complains of the State's decision to open up cinema halls to 100 per cent seating capacity, despite the pandemic remaining such a threat. According to the petitioner, no standard operating procedure has been indicated in the impugned notification of October 23, 2021 for cinema halls or theatres to maintain as they open up completely.

2. To begin with, it must be said that courts would be slow in venturing into the administrative domain, particularly without any cogent adverse material against the impugned administrative action being brought or demonstrated. There is no doubt that the pandemic has not gone away; the debate is still on whether only its tail is left. The recent numbers, despite the festive season, does not raise any alarm of an immediate third surge; though there is no room for any complacency in such regard.

3. Further, the vaccination drive continues unabated and, particularly in urban areas, those willing have obtained double vaccination and there are murmurs now of a booster third dose being applied.

4. In such a scenario, it is expected that the State Government would have taken the pros and cons into consideration before issuing the impugned notification and permitting cinema halls, theatres and like places to be opened up to the extent of 100 per cent of the seating capacity. There is a presumption in favour of the State that when it does something, it does upon taking into account relevant considerations.

5. The underlying objection of the petitioner is that the film industry or the theatre circles have been favoured ahead of others in the lockdown being completely lifted in respect of such industry. The petitioner points out that schools have not opened completely, midday meals are not in place and, as such questions the hurry in which the government has moved to make cinema halls open to the public. Unless the petitioner is able to bring some cogent material which demonstrates the adverse effect of the impugned administrative action, the court cannot go on the insinuation or the innuendo and interdict an administrative order passed by an appropriate authority.

6. As to the petitioner's complaint that no SOP for the purpose has been designed, it is evident that most places have almost fully opened up and the only protocol that is being insisted upon is to wear the mask and maintain the distancing norm. The impugned notification does not do away with the adherence to the Covid protocol at cinema halls and theatres. The fact that no special SOP has been devised for cinema halls and theatres is, thus, of no consequence.

7. WP (MD) No.19705 of 2021 is dismissed, but the State Government is requested to review the situation depending on the number of cases at a particular locality or city or town. There will be no order as to costs. WMP (MD) No.16385 and 16386 of 2021 are closed.