The Officers Recreation Club Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

1.THE OFFICERS RECREATION CLUB, PEDANANDIPADU, GUNTUR DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY P.SRINIVAS S/O. P.SAMBA SHIVA RAO, AGED 54 YEARS, R/O. PEDANANDIPADU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI.

¶14

2.THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶15

3.THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, GUNTUR (SOUTH), GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶16

4.THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PRATHIPADU, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶17

5.THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PEDANANDIPADU VILLAGE AND MANDAI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶18

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶20

1.DHARMA TEJA ALLA

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶22

2

¶23

1.GP FOR HOME

¶24

The Court made the following:

¶25

ORDER:

¶26

The Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-

¶27

“…to issue a writ order or direction especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that aThe action of the respondents in seeking to interfere with the lawful activities of the Petitioner club including playing of rummy game of 13 cards as illegal and arbitrary as Game of Rummy is not a game of chance and bfurther declare that the respondents shall not interfere with the day to day activities of the Petitioner club including the cards room where the Petitioner club is conducting rummy game 13 cards with stakes / syndicate cand pass…”

¶28

Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home.

¶29

Sri Dharma Teja Alla, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, submits that pursuant to the amendment Section 2(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Gaming Act, 2020 (Act 43 of 2020) the club is permitted to organize the playing 13-card rummy game without stakes.

¶30

Sri P. Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, brings to the notice of this Court the order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in I.A. No.7 of 2025 in W.P. No.11394 of 2024, wherein the said I.A. was allowed, setting aside the earlier order dated 15.09.2025 passed in W.P. No.11394 of 2024, by which permission had been granted to the petitioner therein to conduct card rooms for playing the 13-card rummy game without stakes.

¶31

3

¶32

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, it can be safely deduced that conducting card rooms for playing the 13-card rummy game without stakes is not an offence punishable under law. However, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home requests this Court to pass an order enabling the police to have some control or regulation over the activities of the club.

¶33

In view of the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of granting permission to the Petitioner to conduct a card room for playing the 13-card rummy game without stakes. However, the police are at liberty to monitor the activities of the Petitioner club and ensure that the club does not conduct card rooms for playing the 13-card rummy game with stakes. The Respondent Police have the power or authority to inspect the premises of the club. In this regard, the Petitioner club shall arrange adequate CCTV cameras covering the areas of the club so that the Respondent police can monitor the activities of the club and ensure that no violation of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Gaming Act, 1974, as amended, occurs. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶34

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶35

________________________ Dr.Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J.

¶36

Date: 24.03.2026 Note: Issue C.C. by 30.03.2026 B/o VTS

The Officers Recreation Club v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Officers Recreation Club v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Piridi Madhavi, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Maganti Lakshmi Ratna Durga Vani Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Penubadi Ramachandra Rao Vs the State of Ap

Sare Sateesh Kumar Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Chalivendram Subbarayyudu Vs the State of Ap

Gorli Gangu Naidu Alias Chinna Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh