Sinde Achuth Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

Sinde Achuth Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of with a direction to respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to consider the petitioner's representations dated 25.07.2023 and 10.11.2023 (to respondent No. 2) and dated 16.10.2023 (to respondent No. 3) seeking reopening of Mee-Seva Centre TS-RFAD011, and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within two (2) weeks from receipt of a copy of the order, duly communicating the decision to the petitioner; no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions, if any, closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of respondent No. 4 in closing the petitioner's Mee-Seva Centre bearing ID TS-RFAD011 situated at Ponna Village, Ichoda Mandal, Adilabad District, without issuance of any notice or any preceding orders, is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional, violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and in gross violation of principles of natural justice. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition is disposed of directing respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to consider the grievance of the petitioner as put forth in his representations dated 25.07.2023 and 10.11.2023 (addressed to respondent No. 2) and dated 16.10.2023 (addressed to respondent No. 3) seeking reopening of the Mee-Seva Centre bearing ID TS-RFAD011 at Ponna Village, Adilabad District, in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders on the said representations. The Court did not itself adjudicate the legality of the closure of the centre.

Key takeaways

The appropriate orders on the said representations were to be passed within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, and the decision on the representations was to be duly communicated to the petitioner.ratio¶53
There shall be no order as to costs.ratio¶54
As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Constitutional writ (Art. 226) - Closure of petitioner's Mee-Seva Centre (ID TS-RFAD011, Ponna Village, Ichoda Mandal, Adilabad District) by the Mandal Revenue Officer (respondent No. 4) allegedly without notice or preceding orders, following a complaint in which the petitioner was prosecuted in Crime No. 148 of 2020 (SS. 403, 420 IPC; S. 66 I.T. Act) - Unreplied representations dated 25.07.2023, 10.11.2023 (to respondent No. 2) and 16.10.2023 (to respondent No. 3) seeking reopening - Held, without deciding the legality of the closure, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to consider the petitioner's grievance on the said representations and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within two (2) weeks, communicating the decision to the petitioner; no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions closed.

132521

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

TUESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

WRIT PETITION NO: 6371 OF 2025

Between:

Sinde Achuth, S/o. Narayana, Aged about 33 years, Occ ; Business, Ryo. l-45, Ponnalchoda Mandal, Ponna Adilabad, Telanagana-504307.

.....PFT|TtONER

AND

'l . The State of Telangana, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Department of lnformation Technology (lT) and Electronics and Communications (EC), Telanagana-Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. f

The Commissioner, Electronic Services Delivery(ESD), Department of lT and EC, State of Telangana.

The District Collector, Adilabad District, Telanagana.

The Mandal Revehue Office(MRO), lchoda lVandal, Adilabad District.

.....RESPONDENTS

Petition Under Article 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 a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, declaring the the action of the Respondent no. 4 in closing the Petitioner Mee-seva Centre bearing lD. TS-RFAD01 1 situated at Ponna Village, lchoda Mandal, Adilabad District without issuance of any notice or any preceding orders, as being illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional also violative to Article 14, 19 and 21 of Constitution of lndia and also in gross violation of principals of natural^justice and consequently seeking to direct the Respondent no.2 and 3 to permit the Petitioner to reopen the Mee-Seva Centre bearing lD. TS-RFAD0'I^'l situated at Ponna Village, lchoda Mandal, Adilabad District, and run the same in accordance

to rules and guidelines envisaged under^{proceedings vide ProcNo.KRRC-} '1 1 /630/lchoda/20 1 4, Dt. 04-1 2-201 4.

|.A.NO:1 OF 2025

Petition Under Section 15'l CPC^praying that^{in the c rcumstances stated in} the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the^{High Court maybe pleased to} direct respondent No. 2 and 3 to consider there^{presentatior-rsDt. 25-07-2023,10-} 11-2023 and Dt. 16-'10-2023 and take necessary action^{in etccordanr:ewith law to} reopen the Mee-Sev'a Centre^pe(aining to the Petitioner^{bearingCentre ID. TS-} RFAD011 situated at Ponna Village, Ichoda Mandal, Adilabad^District.

|.A.NO:2 OF 2025

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that in the circumstance.s statedⁱⁿ the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High Court may be^{pleased to} permit the Petitioner to operate the [rlee-Seva Centre pertaining to the Petitioner bearing Centre lD. TS-RFAD01'l situated at Ponna Viliage,^{lchoda Mandal,} Adilabad District.

Counsel forthe Petitioner: SRI NARAPARAJU AVANEESH

Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1 & 2 : GP FOR INFORMATION^{AND TECHNOLOGY} Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3 & 4 : G.P FOR REVENUE

The Court made the following ORDER

HON'BLE MRS JUSTTCE SUREPALLT NANDA

WRIT PETITION No.5 LOF2(J25

ORD ER:

.^{Heard SriAvaneeshNarapraju,learned} counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned Assistant Government pleader for Information and Technology appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 and 2 and the learned Assastant Government pleader for Revenue, appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.3 and 4.

2. The oet troner aD Droa hed ecourt seekinq oraver as

u nder:

"...to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, declaring the action of the Respondent no.4 in closing the petitioner Mee_seva Centre bearing ID: TS-RFADO11 situated at ponna Village, Ichoda Mandal, Adilabad District without issuance of any notice or any preceding orders, as being illegal, arbitrary and u ncon stitutiona I also violative to Article 14, Lg & 21 of Constitution of India and also in gross violation of principals of natural justice and consequenUy seeking to dlrect the Respondent no. 2 & 3 to permit the petitioner to reopen the Mee-Seva Centre bearing ID: TS_

2

SN,J wp 6371²⁰²⁵

RFADo11^{situated at PonnaVillage'IchodaMandal'} Adilabad^{District and run the same in accordance} to rules^{andguidelines envisaged under} KRRCproceedings^{vide Proc' No'} U/630/Ichoda /2014,^{DtO4-t2-2014and pass} such other^{order or orders may deern fita nd} proper in the^{circumstances of the case'"}

3 The case^{of the petitioner,in brief is that the petitionerwas} allotted^{a Mee-Seva Centre bearing ID: TS-RFAD011situatedat} Ponna Village,^{Adilabad District by the respondent authorities' The} respondent^{No.4 had shutdown the petitioner's; Mee-sevacenter} without^{issu rngany notice or any precedingorder on the basis of} complaint^{rerlistered againstthe petitionerinstitutedbY the} respondent^{No.4, due to which, the petitioner was falsely implicated} in Cr.No.14B^{of 2020, dated 18'11'2020on the file of the} Gudihathnoor^{Police station for the offences punishableunder} Sections^{403 and 420 of IPC and Section 66 of Il'Act'}

4, It is^{l'urther case ofthe petitionerthat ' vide detailed} 25.07.2023,^{and 10'11'2023addressed to} representations^dated 2 and 3^{representation dated 16'10'2023} the resPondtlnt^Nos' addressed^{to the respondentNo'3' petitionerrequested to reopen}

)

3

SN,J wp_6371 _2025

the Mee-seva center of the petitioner. Though the said representations of petitioner had been acknowledged by the office oF the respondent No.2 on 25.07.2023 and 10.11.2023 and office of the respondent No.3 on 16.10.2023 itself, no action had been initiated by the respondent Nos.2 and 3 on the said representations as on date. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that under criminal law, an accused is not guilty unless proven guilty and therefore, petitioner,s representations ,.need to be considered in accordance to law and appropriate orders passed.

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents do not dispute the said submission made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.

6. Taki nq rn Considerat lon

a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case.

b) The submissions made by the learned counset appearrng on behalf of the petitioner and the learned

4

SN,J wD 6311²⁰²⁵

Assistant^{GovernmentPleaderforInformation and} Technology,^{appearing on behalf of the respondentsNos'1} and 2 and^{the learnedAssistant Government Pleaderfor} Revenue appearing^{on behalf of the respondent Nos'3 and4} a nd,

c) The sPecific Plea^{of the petitioner that no orders have} been^{passedon the representationsof the petitioner dated} 25.07.2fi23^{and 10.11'2O23 addressedto the respondent} No.2 herein^{and representationdated 16'1o'2O23addressed} to the^{respondentNo'3 herein, which had not disputed by} the learned^{counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents'}

The writ^{petition isdisposed ofdirecting the} respondents^{Nos.2 and 3 to considerthe grievance of the} petitioner as^{put-forth vide petitioner'srepresentations} dated^{25.07.2023,tO'Lt'2O23addressedto the respondent} No. 2 herein^{and the representation datedL6'1'O'2O23} addressed^{to the respondent No'3 herein seeking reopening} of petitioner's^{Mee-Seva Centre bearing ID: TS-RFADOI1} situated at^{PonnaVillage, Adilabad Districtin accordance to} law and^{pass appropriate orders on the said representations}

5

SN,J w-6371²⁰²⁵

within^{a periodof two(2)weeks from the date of receipt of a} copy of^{this order and duly communicatethe decision upon} the said^{representationsto the petitionerherein' However'}

there shall^{be no order as to costs'}

As a^{sequel, themiscellaneouspetitions' if}

any^{pending,in the Writ Petition shall also standclosed'}

SD/.^P 5$BTiil+"-EI.EFRRX

//TRUE^COPY//

ECTION^OFFICER

To

1 rheprincipars."!,"r.,3:^Dfi trla.tronics and^Communtca illT?iu:#H?:"#IrX"I:?j?:JSJi;l8' E[t',];iil;;; +,119:l?131,,"". Derivery(ESD), Dedartment^{or rr and}

1. The Commissioner,^Electror

.) 4. 5 titUd",Uf**tf^{",iUl6X+ig:fA#5::'r'$'3:1^"'} tt +;t:'::?j:"fi3ilf,J?Ellt'^{Hish court ror the Stateor reransanaat}

7 B'.l%tii^{JR|JIRAPARAJ u A'AN EESH' Advocate toP u cI}

7 o Two CD^CoPies SA GJP

C.C. TODAY

HIGH COURT

DATED:0410312025

ORDER

WP.No.6371 of 2025

1r\ i ST47: ('
(
a'
v
i!,
12 t4AR 2025
ii")
).,lt
'.. /rr - ^
- --

DISPOSING OF THE W.P

WITHOUT COSTS.

<br>k>