Disposed

Awqaf Committee H.E.H. the Nizam v. the State of Telengana

Telangana HC24 Jul 2025WP/21493/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A wakf committee sought police bandobast for religious programmes at a masjid and ashoorkhana at Moula Ali, alleging inaction on its application. Police reported no law and order likelihood and stated surveillance and traffic staff were deployed. The court directed authorities to ensure no disturbance to the programmes and to act immediately on any incident.

What the court decided

AI extract

Awqaf Committee H.E.H. the Nizam Vs the State of Telengana — Telangana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

[³¹⁶⁶ ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Speciat Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

THURSDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR

¶6

WRIT PETI TION NO:21 493 0F 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

AWQAF colvMrrrEE H E.H. THE NTZAM, Represented by rts Secretary Syed_Abdulah euadri, S/o sygo zqirlui no.jji.i o[rori nse. door;t sdv;;;1 Occ.Secretary. Office of trre'Awqii C.rritt"LlU"ilina ilrr.;iJ e'Lroi. i<i|rii Koti, Hyderab-ad 500029.

¶9

.,.PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 Ll.lE 9TA.lE^{OF TELENGAN{,Represented} by Secretary, Depa(ment of lVlinority Wetfare. Secreta riat Au itO ihg, Hvdeiab'aO.J.6'

¶12

2 The Chief Executive Officer, Tetangana State Wakf Board, Hajj House House, Nampally, Hyderabad, T.S.

¶13

J The.Dy. Commissioner Of police,. Malkajgiri Zone, lValkajgiri. Division, Rachakonda Commissioneratg,^N9ri r,rr:iir,rigiri Cb,;['Co,i,piui, N""i"tr"t, Secunderabad, Telangana 500056.

¶14

4 Ihe^{Asst. CommissionerOf potice, lValkajgiri} Division, Rachakonda Co m m iss io n e rate, Uppal, Tetangani.

¶15

5 The_ Station House Officer, IVala(giri police station, Malkajgiri Zone, Malkajgiri Division, Rachakonda Ctrririionei"i".'''-

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Articre 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit titeo therewitn, tre Hrgrr'cJrrt ,"v ou pleased to issue a writ, ord.er, or Direction, more particurarry one in the nature of a writ of Mandamus, decraring the inaclion of Respondents N o. 2 and s in rairingt"^{act upon the apprication dated} 14ro7t2ozs vide no. 15211407251312214407 submitted by the petitioner, for porice Bandobast "r,rrtun at .Y:s9"r -Maha^{LaqqaBai, IVrasjid ino nsrroorxrrana"} situated at Moura Ari, Malkajgiri Mandal, Secunderabad, Telangana State, as bad, arbitrary, ilfegl[ anO violative of Article 14 and 3004 of the Coistitution oi tnoia, t gSO

¶18

IAN O: 1 OF 2025

¶19

PetitionunderSectionl5lCPcprayingthatinthecircumstancesstatedin the affidavit^{filed in supportof the petition, tn" Hign Court maybe pleased .t-o-{ltd} the2nd-sthRespondentshereintoconsidertheapplicationdatedl4loTl202S vide chattan^{no. ls2il4oi2sltlzzlqqolsubmitted by the Petitioner,,.forPolice} Bandobastat..MaqberaMahaLaqqaBai,Masjid&Ashoorkhana',,pending disposal of^{the above Writ Petition}

¶20

Counsel for^{the Petitioner:SRl. SYED ALI}

¶21

Counsel for^{the RespondentNo.1:GP FOR MINORIW AND SOCIALWELFARE} Counsel for^{the RespondentNo'2: SRI FARHANAZAM KHAN SC FOR WAKF} BOARD

¶22

Counsel for^{the RespondentNos'3 to 5: GPFORHOME}

¶23

The Court made^{the following:ORDER}

¶24

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR

¶25

W.P.N o.2t493 of 2o2s

¶26

ORD ER:

¶27

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government pleader for Minority & Social Welfare appearing for respondent No.1, Sri Farhan Azam Khan, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.2, learned Government Pleader for Home appearlng for respondent Nos.3 to S, and with their consent, the Writ petition is. taken up fbr hearing and disposal at admission stage.

¶28

2 The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that it had approached the 5th respondent_authority and submitted a representation, dt'14 07 '2025, seeking to provide necessary porice bandobast in and around^,,Maqbera Maha Laqqa Bai, Mas3id & Ashoorkhana,, situated at Moula Ali, Malkajgiri Mandal, Secunderabad, Telangana State, from 26.02.2025 to OZ.OB.2O25, to ensure peace and smooth conduct of religious programmes; and that despite the petitioner approaching the respondents_authorities and submitting the afore said representation, no action has been taken

¶29

¶30

¶31

thereon^{by the respondents-authoritiesby makingnecessary} arrangements^{by providingpoliceprotection/ bandobast'}

¶32

Per contra,learned^{Government Pleader for Home appearing} on behalf^{of respondent Nos'3 to 5 wouid submit that as per the} intelligence^{report obtained by the respondents-police' there is no} rikerihood^{of any law & order probrem arising at the subject place} during^{the period from 26'06'2025 to 07 'O8'2O25;and that in the} event^{of any contingencyarising'the respondents-authoritiesu'ill} take further^{action exercising their powers conferredunder} H.vderabacl^{City Police Actas well as under Cr'P'C'}

¶33

Learned^{GovernmentPleaderwould further submit that in} addition^{to deployingthe normalpolice force to regulate the traffic} as well^{as ensuring maintenance of law & order situation'the} respondents-authorities^{are also keeping regularsurveillanceat} the subject^{location and in the event of any untowardincident} taking^{place, the respondents-authoritieswould take further} action^{dePending on the situation}

¶34

5 The aforesaid^{submission made by the learned Government}

¶35

Pleader^{for Home is takenon record'}

¶36

¶37

In view of the aforesaid submissions made and since, it is stated that as per the inteliigence gathered by the respondents_ authorities there is no likelihood of law & order problem arising at the subject location during the period from 26.o7.2o2s to 07.OB.2O2S and that the respondents_authorities already having kept surveillarce as well as deploying staff to regulate the traffic and maintaining raw & order situation at the subject location, this Court is of the view that the responclents_authorities are to be directed to ensure that no disturbance is caused to the religious programme at the subject place during the said period and in the event of any such incident taking place, the respondents_ authorities shall take immediate action, in accordance with law.

¶38

Subject to the above directions, the Writ petition is disposed

¶39

of. No order as to costs.

¶40

B Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

¶41

SD/. K.BHAVANI SWAMY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY//

¶42

SECT FFICER

¶43

To, 1 T.he Secretary,_Department of ltrlinority Welfare, Secretariat Building, Hyderabad, T.G.

¶44

2 The Chief Executive Officer, Telangana State Wakf Board, Hajj House House, Nampally, Hyderabad, T.S.

¶45

¶46

The Dv.^{CommissionerOf Police, Malkaigiri Zone' tvlalkaiqiri' Division'} Rachakonda^{commissi#erJi", rrri,iiH,tiirrigiricourtcomplex,Neredmet,} Secunderabad,^{Telangana 500056'}

¶47

The Asst.^{Commissioner Of Police, Malkajgiri Division' Rachakonda} Commissionerate,^{Uppal, Telangana}

¶48

5,ThestationHouseofficer,tr/lalakjgiriPolicestation,IVlalkajgiriZone'

¶49

t,luit rlgiti Division Rachakonda Commisslonerate

¶50

One CC^{to SRl. SYED ALI Advocate [OPUC]}

¶51

One CC^{to SRI FARHAN AZAIU KHAN SC FOR WAKF BOARDIOPUCI}

¶52

B. Two CCs^{to GP FORMINORITYANDSOCIAL WELFARE 'High Court for} the State of^Telangana. [OUTI

¶53

Two CCs^{to GPfor Home,HighCourt for the State of Telanganaat} Hyderabad. [OUT]

1O.Two CD^CoPies

KKS LS \qr

HIGH GOURT

DATED:24t07t2025

)

ORDER

.../'.i;alHt 51,
?r,
10 ttP 20fr
t +

¶62

WP.No.21493 of 2O2S

¶63

DISPOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶64

\^cot'"- XN

Awqaf Committee H.E.H. the Nizam v. the State of Telengana

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Awqaf Committee H.E.H. the Nizam v. the State of Telengana

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Sanem Krishna Goud Vs State of Telangana

Mr. Ghanshyam Das Karwa Vs The State of Telangana

Ramreddy Chicken Market Vs The State of Telangana and 3 others

Shaheen Begum Vs The State of Telangana

Cheela Maruthi Vs State of Telangana

Khethavath Ghamsamma Vs The State of Telangana