Disposed

Sri. Md. Jahangir Ali v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC15 Dec 2025WP/37556/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition by an association president alleging police interference in association affairs and coercion to settle a civil dispute pending as S.O.P. No. 23 of 2025. Court recorded submissions that police were only investigating Crime No.112/2025 and directed authorities to follow due procedure.

What did the court decide?

Respondent authorities directed to follow due procedure under law; petitioner to cooperate with investigation in Crime No.112/2025; no costs.

Sri. Md. Jahangir Ali Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[^32ss ]

¶2

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

¶3

MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 37556 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

Sri. Md. Jahangir Ali, s/o- Md. Afzal, Aged 52 years, Occ- Driver, president of Telangana Government Drivers Central Association, Rl/o-District Medical and Health office, Nalgonda.

¶9

.,.PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State of Telangana, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Tank Bund Hyderabad

¶12

2 The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Saifabad, Hyderabad. The Station House Officer, Saifabad Police Station, Lakdikapul, Hyderabad.

¶13

4 Sri. Sard_ar Manjeet Singh, S/o- Sardar Lakhan Singh, Aged 55 years, OccTractor Driver, Rr/o- H.No. 2-5-3637, Back side of Lucky Lodge; Sikhwada, Karimnagar town AND District. Ph- 8008429602.

¶14

5 Sri Syed Hqgham Hussaini, s/o- Syed Karimullah Hussaini, Aged 56 years, Occ- Driver, H.No.6-2-92'l11, Chinthal Basti Khairtabad, Hyderabad.

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Arlicle 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue any writ order or direction more in the nature of Writ of ft/andamus declaring the action of the respondent nos.2 and 3 herein in interfering in the civil disputes pending between petitioner and the unofficial respondents, threatening the petitioner to settle the civil disputes with unofficial respondents and interfering with the affairs of the Telangana Government Drivers Central Association and not allowing the petitioner to manage the affairs of the association under the guise of S.O.P.No. 23 of 2025 pending on the file of Hon'ble lX Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, as illegal, arbitrary

¶17

¶18

and contrary to law and and consequen y direct the responc r nt nos.2 and 3 and their subordinates not to interfere with the affairs of the ass )ciation and not to threaten the petitioner to handover the charge to the unofficial -espondents.

¶19

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶20

Petition under section 1sl cpc praying that in the cirr;r mstarices stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court nay be pleased to direct the respondent nos.2 and 3 and their subordinates no1 o interfere with the affairs of the association and not to restrain the petitioner lom performing his duties as President to the office of relangana Governmr rt Drivers central Association, Hyderabad, pending disposal of the above writ p 3 ition.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI PRAMOD SINGH

¶22

Counsel for the Respondents No.1to3 : ASST. Gp FOR HOwI|

¶23

Counsel for the Respondents No.4&5 :

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

-'l

)

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAI)

¶30

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR

¶31

WRIT PETTTION No.37556 of2O25

¶32

DATE: 15.12-2o25.

¶33

Between:

¶34

Sri Md. Jahangir Ali.

¶35

...Petitioner

¶36

AND

¶37

The State of Telangana Rep by its Principal Secretar5r Home Department Secretariat Tank Bund Hyderabad and four others

¶38

SRDER:

¶39

"'ResPondents

¶40

Heard Sri Pramod Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner ald learned Assistant Government pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3. with their consent this writ petition is taken up for disposa_t at the admission stage itself. Notice to respondent Nos.4 and 5 are hereby dispensed with.

¶41

, This writ petition is filed seeking following prayer:-

¶42

"...to issue ang utit order or direction more in the nature of Wit of Mandamus declaing the action of the respondent nos. 2 and 3 herein in interfeing in the

¶43

¶44

¶45

ciuil disputes pending between petitioner znd tle unofficial respondents, tlveatening the peti ioner to settLe the ciuil disputes Luith unoffi.cial re:\ Dndents and interfertng uith the affairs of the i-,'Iangana Gouent ment Diuers Central Association tnd^.not allowing the petitioner to manage the alfai s of the association under the guise of S.O.P..lVo. 23 of 2025 pending on the file of Hon'bLe IX Additicr al Chief Judge, Citg Ciuil Court, Hgderabad, or illegal, arbitrary and contrary to la u.t and and cor.: equentlg direct the respondent nos.2 and 3 u td their subordinates not to interfere utith the affai's of the association and not to threaten the peti ioner to handouer the charge to the unofftcial respon; =nts and to pass.. ."

¶46

The facts of the case in brief as statec are that the petitioner is a Government Jeep Driver working; in the District Medical Health Office, Nalgonda, and is the dul / elected State President of the Telangala Goverirment I)^.ivers Central Association. Upon completion of the earlier terrr. elections were conducted pursuant to notihcation vide Rc.No. ELECTIONS/2O2S dated 26.04.2025, the 1 etitioner was unanimously elected as President, which was c: tlirmed by the Assistalt Registrar/ Election Officer, Sangaredc . District, vide Rc.No. Elections/2025 dated 04.OS.2O2S. Thereafter, Respondent No.S filed S.O.P. No.23 of 2O2S undr r Section 23 of

/ I

,7 I /

the Telangarra societies Registration Act, 2oor, before the learned IX Additional Chief Judge, Cify Civil Court, Hyderabad, wherein status-quo order was granted on 19.O6.2O25. The said order was not extended and stood expired on L9.O9.2025, despite the expiry of the said interim order, respondent No.S, with the help of respondent Nos.2 and 3, has been unlawfully interfering with the functioning of the Association. In particular, Respondent No.3 has been interfering with the day_to_day affairs of the Association and restraining the petitioner from discharging his lawful duties as President, besides threatening him with fa.lse criminal cases to coerce settlement of a civil dispute. Aggrieved by the actions of respondent Nos.2 and 3, the petitioner has approached this Court by liling the present writ petition.

¶51

Learned Assistant Government pleader for Home appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. I to 3, on instructions from the Sub_ Inspector of Police, Saifabad police Station, Hyderabad, submitted that the petitioner had earlier filed W.p. No.12353 of 2025 before this Court seeking the following reliet

¶52

"to declare the action of the 3rd respondent arrd his subordinates in threatenrng the petitioner to setfle the civil disputes with unofficial respondents and further interfering with the affairs of the Telangana Government Drivers Central Association and not allowing the peLitione: to mallage the allairs of the association as illegal arbitrary and contrary to law and orders passed by this Hon,ble court in C. R. P. No. 1257 of 2023 alld consequently direct the respondent no 3 and his subordinates not to interfere with the affairs of the association a-nd not to restrain the petitioner from performing his duties as President to the office of Telangana t\

¶53

¶54

Governmeni Drivers Central Association Hyderabarl :rnd to pass such other ord€rs."

¶55

It is further su6idtted that during the p: rdency of the earlier writ petition, Respondent No.S approacl- ( d Respondent No.3 and lodged a complaint on 17.O4.2O25, pur; rarlt to which, after conducting 4 ) preliminary enquiry, t -1 I respondent authorities registered Crime No.112 of 2025 dattd 17.04.2025, arraying the petitioner as Accused No.1. It is fur her submitted that except for conducting investigation in the I aid crime, the respondent authorities have not interfered in tl e alleged civil dispute between the petitioner and the unofficiz I respondents. The said Writ Petition No.12353/2025 was dislr sed of by this Court on 24.04 .2025. It is further submitted hat even after Iiling of the present writ petition, respondent No.z has only been conducting investigation in the a_foresaid crim r and has not interfered with the civil disputes pending bet,*,ee r . the petitioner and respondent Nos.4 and 5.

¶56

Recording the submissions made by l: rned counsel appearing on either side, this writ petition is ri sposed of with consent directing the respondent authorities to follow due procedure as contemplated under law, for any f_ rther course of action. The petitioner shall, however, coop : -ate with the investigation in pending Crime No.1 12/2025 d.at(t tZ.O4.2O2S.

¶57

¶58

¶59

With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. Miscellaleous applications, if any pending, shall stand

¶60

closed. No order as to costs.

¶61

Sd/-P.PONNA KRISHNA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

1 . The Principal Secretary,^{HomeDepartment, Secretariat,TelanganaState,} Tank Bund Hyderabad

¶66

The Assistant Commissioner^{of Police, Saifabad,Hyderabad'}

¶67

The Station House^{Officer, Saifabad Police Station, Lakdikapul, Hyderabad}

¶68

One CC to SRI^{PRAMOD SINGH, Advocate'} [OPUC]

¶69

Two CCs to GP^{FORHOME, High Court for the Stateof Telangana'[OUT]}

¶70

Two CD^CoPies.

BSK

PMK

HIGH COURT

DATED:1 511212025

ai
'1
1.: t. .
.j
iJ I
I JAN 2020 '=
c)
i<br>*

¶78

ORDER

¶79

WP.No.37556 of 2025

¶80

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶81

Sri. Md. Jahangir Ali v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Md. Jahangir Ali v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G. Venkataiah Goud Vs The State of Telangana Represented by its Principal Secretary

G. Rukmini Bai Vs R.V. Karnan

M/s. Ocean Breeze Luxury Spa Vs The State of Telangana

Sri.B.Kesava Rao Vs The State of Telagana

Smt. Bachu Bhavani Vs The State of Telangana

M/s Streamerzone Vs State of Telangana