IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.17507 of 2014 BETWEEN V. Surender Reddy and others.
AND ... PETITIONERS The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others.
...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners: MR. N. ASHWANI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME (TG) ADVOCATE GENERAL (TG) The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Home.
2. Petitioners are stated to be members of respondent No.8 – club and the said club is stated to be primarily relating to library usage and ancillary activities. Petitioners are practicing advocates and are regularly accessing and using the facilities of library installed within the club premises. Respondent No.8 – club is stated to be a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and alleging that there is illegal interference by the police, the present writ petition is filed.
The affidavit of the petitioners also makes a reference to various orders of this Court passed from time to time viz. WP.No.16110 of 2009 dated 06.08.2009; WP.No.17256 of 2009 dated 20.08.2009 including the order in WP.No.24533 of 2011 and batch dated 09.09.2011, which was disposed of with the following directions:
“In the light of the provisions of the Act, and the law laid down in the judgments aforementioned, I consider it appropriate to direct the respondents not to interfere with any card game of Rummy (a 13 Cards game), whatever be the stakes, being played in these clubs. It is made clear that this order shall not preclude the respondents from entering the clubs concerned and from taking action in terms of Section 5 of the Act and, thereafter, to initiate penal proceedings under Sections 3 and 4 for violations of the provisions of the Act. The petitioner clubs shall cause no hindrance to the respondents in exercising their statutory powers under Section 5 or any other provisions of the Act.”
3. Counter affidavit has since been filed by respondent No.5 and it is stated in paras 2 and 7 as follows:
“2. It is respectfully submitted that, the 5th and 6th respondents are not interfering and not disturbing the usage of Library, Reading Room, Gymnasium, Swimming Pool, Tennis and other indoor and outdoor games by the petitioners in 8th Respondent club.
… 7. It is respectfully submitted that the 6th and 7th respondents are not interfering with the lawful cultural and recreational activities of the members of the 8th respondent’s club and not restrained the petitioners from entering into the premises for their regular library use and access.”
4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioners states that in view of the aforesaid averments that there is no illegal interference, as stated in the paras extracted above, the grievance of the petitioners in the writ petition stands redressed to that extent and as such, no further orders are necessary.
In view of the above, the writ petition is accordingly disposed of. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J October 20, 2014 DSK