Dismissed¶35

B.Vishwanatham v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC26 Aug 2025WP/40065/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Telangana High Court; W.P. No. 40065 of 2016; dismissed as infructuous; no costs; Justice N. Tukaramji; decided 26.08.2025; arms licence renewal application dated 05.04.2016 pending; insistence on surrender of weapon by SHO Chandanagar Police Station, Cyberabad; show cause notice dated 23.08.2016, Rc.No.47/Ren/M/Arms/CybWest/2016, issued by Commissioner of Police Cyberabad; petitioner's explanation dated 06.09.2016; writ of mandamus under Article 226; interim relief under Section 151 CPC (WPMP No. 49354 of 2016); cause did not survive; AGP for Home R. Laxmikanth Reddy; counsel D. Edukondalu; miscellaneous petitions closed.

What did the court decide?

None; the writ petition was dismissed as infructuous with no order as to costs, and pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, were directed to stand closed. ¶35

B.Vishwanatham Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; the writ petition was dismissed as infructuous with no order as to costs, and pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, were directed to stand closed.

¶35

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of respondent No.5 in insisting the petitioner surrender his weapon, despite his explanation dated 06.09.2016 to the show cause dated 23.08.2016 (Rc.No.47/Ren/M/Arms/CybWest/2016) and during pendency of the renewal application dated 05.04.2016, is illegal, arbitrary and unjust, warranting a direction that respondent No.5 not insist on surrender of the weapon.

¶29

Court's answer

Recording the submissions of both learned counsel - that the cause in the writ petition does not survive for adjudication and that the learned Assistant Government Pleader takes no objection - the Court dismissed the writ petition as infructuous, with no order as to costs.

¶35

Ratio / Principle

Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

¶36

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad (N. Tukaramji, J.), W.P. No. 40065 of 2016, decided 26.08.2025 - An ex-serviceman petitioner sought a writ of mandamus under Article 226 declaring illegal the action of respondent No.5 (Station House Officer, Chandanagar Police Station, Cyberabad) in insisting that he surrender his weapon despite his explanation dated 06.09.2016 to a show cause notice dated 23.08.2016 (Rc.No.47/Ren/M/Arms/CybWest/2016) issued by respondent No.2 (Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad), while his renewal application dated 05.04.2016 was pending; an interim application under Section 151 CPC (I.A. No. 1 of 2016 / WPMP No. 49354 of 2016) sought suspension of the surrender demand. At hearing, counsel for the petitioner submitted that the cause did not survive for adjudication and sought dismissal as infructuous; the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home took no objection. Recording the submissions, the Court dismissed the writ petition as infructuous, with no order as to costs, and closed pending miscellaneous applications. The merits of the weapon-surrender/renewal dispute were not adjudicated.

¶1

13217 |

¶2

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

¶3

TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 40065 OF 2016

¶7

Between:

¶8

B.Vishwanatham, S/o Late B.Nagappa, aged about 57 years, Occ ExServiceman, R/o H.No. 3-541614, PIot No 287, lvllc'2, Laxmi Residency Flat No. 4, 1st floor, Hyderabad.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

2 The Commissioner of Police Cyberabad, Commissionerate Office at Gachibowli, Hyderabad.

¶13

¶14

The Deputy Commissioner of Police Madhapur, Zone, Cyberabad.

¶15

4 The Assistant Commissioner of Police, lrladhapur Division, Cyberabad.

¶16

5 The Station House Officer Chandanagar Police, Station, Cyberabad.

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

Petition under Article 226 of lh'e Constitution of lndia^praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may^be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to declare the action of the respondent No.5 herein in insisting the petitioner to surrender the Weapon inspite of submitting the explanation dt 6-9-2016 to the show cause dt- 23-82016 issued by the 2nd respondent bearing Rc.No.47lRen/tt/2/Arms/Cyb-West/2016 and during the pendency of the renewal appiication dt. 5-4-20'16 as being illegal, arbitrary and unjust and consequently direct the 5th respondent herein not to insist to surrender the weapon belonging to the^petitioner herein.

¶19

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2016(WPMP. NO: 49354 oF 2016)

¶20

Petition undc:r section 151 cpc praying that in th€ circumstances statec in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High c r rrt may be pleased tc direct the 5th respondent herein not to insist or seize thr: lVeapon belonging tc the petitioner durirrg the pendency of the renewal app ication dt. 5-4-2016. pending drsposal of the main Writ petition.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI EDUKONDALU.D

¶22

Counsel for the Respondents: SRI R.LAXMIKANTH REDtt^,. AGp FOR HOME

¶23

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶24

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

¶25

WRIT PETITION No.40065 OF 2016

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

This Writ Petition is filed under Arlicle 226 of Constitution of lndia

¶28

seeking the following relief:

¶29

"...1o lssue a writ or order more pafticularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus to declare the action of the respondent No 5 herein in rnslsting the pelitioner to surrender the Weapon inspite of submitting the explanation dated 06.09.2016 to the show cause dated 23.08.2016 issued by the respondent bearing Rc.No.47/Ren/M/Arms/CybWest/201 6 and during the pendency of the renewal application dt.05.04.2016 as being illegal, arbitrary and unjust and consequently direct the sth respondent herein nol lo insisf to surrender the weapon belonging to the petitioner hereinto pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit just and proper in the circumstances of the case . . ..^"

¶30

Heard Mr.D.Edukondalu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R.Laxmikanth Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondents

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the cause in this Writ Petition does not survive for adjudication and seeks to dismiss this Writ Petition as infructuous.

¶32