M/s.Ancient Spa and Wellness Vs The State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2026)

M/s.Ancient Spa and Wellness Vs The State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ Petition disposed of: petitioner permitted to continue business operations subject to strict adherence to the stipulated conditions (customer register, occasional police verification by officers not below Sub-Inspector rank, back door kept open during working hours, no immoral activity) and to all statutory requirements and executive notifications in force; deviation or violation entitles police to act in accordance with law; no order as to costs; pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand closed. The legality of the impugned notification itself was not adjudicated.

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of respondent No. 2 in issuing the impugned notification dated 30-06-2010 and the alleged police interference with the petitioner's spa/massage business is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution, warranting a writ of mandamus and setting aside of the notification. +1 more

Court's answer

Continuation of business is subject to compliance with all statutory requirements and executive notifications in force; in the event of any deviation by the petitioner from the guidelines or violation of the conditions of the notification, the respondents/police authorities shall be at liberty to take appropriate action in accordance with law.

Ratio / Principle

Having regard to the facts and in the interest of justice, the Court permitted the petitioner to continue business operations subject to strict and scrupulous adherence to the guidelines set out in the extracted coordinate-bench order, namely: maintaining a register recording dates of customers' visits, their names, verifiable addresses and phone numbers; liberty to any police officer not below the rank of Sub-Inspector to verify such records occasionally and to ascertain whether a customer solicited special services; liberty to police to take appropriate action depending on verification and on whether cross-massage is professional; the back door of the premises not to remain closed during working hours; and no immoral activity to be carried on under the guise of whole-body massage.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Telangana High Court (N. Tukaramji, J.), Writ Petition No. 4494 of 2026, disposed of 13-02-2026. M/s Ancient Spa & Wellness (proprietor Kamireddy Mahesh), operating at Serilingampally, Ranga Reddy District under the Cyberabad Police Commissionerate, sought a writ of mandamus under Article 226 declaring illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory a notification dated 30-06-2010 issued by the Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad (respondent No. 2), terming it violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) and contrary to the Hyderabad City Police Act, 1348 Fasli, on the ground of police interference with its spa/massage business. The Assistant Government Pleader for Home submitted that a crime had been registered and charge sheet filed, denied interference, and prayed for a conditional order mirroring similar matters. Following its order dated 28.09.2022 in W.P.Nos. 16281 and 16419 of 2010 (batch), which itself disposed of those petitions in terms of the order dated 04.02.2021 in I.A.No.1 of 2020 in W.P.No.24410 of 2020, the Court permitted the petitioner to continue business subject to strict adherence to the extracted guidelines: a register of customers' dates of visit, names, verifiable addresses and phone numbers; occasional verification of records by a police officer not below Sub-Inspector rank; police liberty to act on verification results and on whether cross-massage is professional; back door not kept closed during working hours; and no immoral activity under the guise of whole-body massage. Continuation is subject to statutory requirements and executive notifications; deviation entitles police to act in accordance with law. Disposed of without costs; pending miscellaneous applications closed. The Court did not rule on the validity of the impugned notification itself.

\i=.

It :

1s217 |

I i { I I

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

FRIDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TTJKARAMJI

WRIT PETITION NO: 4494 OF 2026

Between:

{,4/s.Ancient Spa & Wellness, # PIot No.10, 2nd Floor, Sri Rangapurarn Colony, lrladinaguda, Serilingampally, Ranga Reddy District, Rep. by its Proprietor Kamireddy Mahesh, S/o.K.Raja Reddy, aged about 30 years, Occ. Business.

...PETITIONER

AND

1 The State of Telangana. Represented by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, T.S. Secretariat, Hyderabad, Telangana State.

2 The Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad Police Commissoinerale, Hyderabad, Telangana State.

3 The Station House Officer, l/iyapur Police Station, Hyderabad, Telangana State.

...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 an Order, Direction or Writ, more particularly a Writ of TVANDAIVUS declaring the action of the 2"d respondent in issuing the impugned notification No.(L&O)/tt44i3 14Ol2O1O, dated: 30-06-2010 passed by the 2nd respondent as illegal. arbitrary, discriminatory. volatile of Article 14, 1 9 (1 ) (g) of the Constitution of lndia, contrary to the^provisions of the Hyderabad City Police Act, 1348 Fasli and consequently set-aside the same against the petitioner, in the interest of Justice

IANO:1OF2 o26

Petition under Section 151 CpC praying that in the o oumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High C.rr t may be pleased to suspend the lmpugned notification no (L&O)/tV4l 314At201), dated. 30_06_2010 passed by the 2nd respondent against the petitioner, pencin,l cisposar of the above Writ Petition

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI MOHD SUBHAN pASHA

Counsel for the Respondents: SRI D. PRADEEp. AGp FOR HOME

The Court made the following: ORDER

)

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR^{THE STATEOF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD}

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^N.TUKARAMJI

WRIT PETITION No.4494 OF 2026

DATE: L3.O2.2O26

Between:

M/s Ancient^{Spa and Wellness, Represented by itsProprietor} Kamireddy^Mahesh.

... Petitioner

AND

The State^{of Telangana,} Rep., by its^{Principal Secretary,} Home Department^{and 2 others}

.,, Respondents

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is^filed under^{Article 226 of Constitutionof}

India seeking^{the following relief/s:-}

"... pleased to issue :rn Order, Direction or Writ, more particularly a Writ of MANDAMUS declaring ttte action of the 2nd rcspondent in issuing the impugned notification No.(Land O)lM4l 3l4Ol2OlO, dated.30 O6-2010^passed by tJ.e 2nd respondcnt as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, volatile of Artrcle 14, 19^{(1) (g)} of^the Constitution of India, contrary to tJle^provisions of the Hyderabad City Police Act, 1348 Fasii and consequently set-aside the same against the^petitioner, in the^interest ofjustice and grant such other necessary relief or reliefs

IJ

2

as this Hon'ble Court may^{deem ht and proc' inthe} circumstances of the case..."

f{eard Mr. Mohd Subhan Pasha,^{learned ,] ,.rnsel for the} petitioner and Mr.D.Pradeep, learned^{Assistzut (iovernment} Pleader for Homc appearing for^respondents

Learned counsei for the^{petitioner subr} tits^thatthe responclent pollcc authorities are interfering^{rvith he petitioner's} business under the guise of the^{impugnednotili: I -lon. Aggrieved} bv such interference, the present^petition has^{be: Ifiled seeking} appro pri:Lte dircctions.

4.1. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for^{I , tnc. appearing} for the respondents, submits that crime was regist-'-':d^zrgainstthe petitioner and after completion of investigation charge sheet rvas filed. Furthcr submits that during the course^{< f investigation,} the respondents/ police authorities interacted^{r,r'jt: the petitioner} emd inspected the premises concerned.^{Thc ,rllegationsof} interference by the police with the petitioner's^{bus i:-ressactivities} are, therefore, baseless, as the respondents have'^{z c:ted} strictlyⁱⁿ accordarce with the legal procedures established^{L1 law}

4.2. Additionallv, he fairly submits that. a^{Coor,lnate Bench of} .this^{Court, inseveralsimilar writpetitions.h,as permitted}

4.-\

\

,)

w

,i'

.

petitioners to continue their business operations^{subject to} compiialce with certain specified conditions, ald^{has clarified} that aly violation or transgression of appiicable notifications^or statutory provisions would entitle the^{respondents/police} authorities to take appropriate action in^{accordance with 1aw. He,} therefore, prays that a similar order be^passed in^{the presentcase.}

I have carefuliy perused the material available^{on record.}

As rightly pointed out by the learned^{AssistantGovernment} Pleader for Home, this Court, in^{W.P.Nos. 16281 and164 19 of} 20 10 ald the connected batch of matters,^{vide order dated} 28.09 .2022, permitted the continuance^{of businessoperations,} subject to compliance with certarn stipulated^{conditions. The} relevarlt portion of the^{judgmentis extracted hereunder:}

"In view of the submissions of^{learned counsel for both sides,} these Writ Petrtions are disposed of^{in terms of order dated} 04.02.2021 in I.A.No.1 of 2020 in^{W.P.No.244lOof 2O2O'} permitting the petitioners [o run the massage centers

subject to maintaining a record in^{the register to be maintained} by the massage centers containing the^{dates of visits of the} customers, their names and verihable addresses^{together with the} phone numbers, so as to enable the police to contact^{themon the} aspect of the request to the^owner f^manager f^{operator of the} massage centers to provide for the^{helpfrom the opposite sex'}

Further, it shall be open to^{any policeofhcer not belowthe} rank of a Sub-Inspector of Police attached to any^{policestation to}

4

verify once in a while such records^{maintainec try the massage} centers ancl he shall also^{be at liberty to verifl I ; to u'hetherthe} particular customer has solicited any^{suchsp': ial servicefrom} the massagc centre or not.

It ts aiso open to the policc to take^a; rroprlaLe actlon dcpending upon the result of any^{such verir} ; etion and also considering the fact that^{whetherthe cross} rrassage service provided to the customers is in^{professional m:rrt} r,lr or not.. Police are also entitled Lo investigate^{into crimes,if anl} , r eported against the petitioncrs.

Petitioners are also directed^not to^{keep llemain door o[} the premiscs closed, during^{the working hoursSiubiectto thcse} conditions, the petitioners may be^{permittetlo carry on thc} business, dul1, taking a1l necessary^{and prop:precautions to} ensure thzrt no incident of immoral^{activity is r e.rried on under} the guise oi providing whole body^massage."

Having regard to the facts and circumstar^{{ os of the casc,} and in the interest of^justice, this Court^{deems iappropriate to} permit the petitioner to continue business operat ons, subject^to the strict and scrupulous adherence to^{the guidel :es set forthin} the preceding paragraphs. Ordered accordingly.

It is, horvever, clarified that such^{continLr.. trle of business} shall be subject to complialce with all statutory^r: luirements^and executive notifications in force. In the^{event of i ry deviationby} the petitioner from the above mentioned^{guidelir t sr or a violation} of the conditions of the notification, the^{rer; ),rndents} /^police

\

5

,/'

authorities shall be at liberty to take appropriate action in

accordance with law.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There sha-1l be

no order as to costs

Pending miscellarleous applications, if any, shall stand

closed.

//TRUE COPY//

SD/-P.PONNA KRISHNA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 6 SECTION OFFICER

To 1. The Principal Secretary,^{Home Department, State of Telangana,T'S'} Secretariat, Hyderabad,^{TelanganaState.}

2]lhe Commissioner of^{Police, Cyberabad PoliceCommissoinerate,} Hyderabad, Telangana State.

The Station House^{Officer,I,4iyapurPolice Station, Hyderabad,Telangana} State.

One CC to SRI^{N/OHDSUBHANPASHA,Advocate} [OPUC]

Two CCs to GP for^{Home,High Court for the State of Telangana at} Hyderabad. [OUT]

6 Two CD Copies

MPGJP "9-

t i I

l, t:ri E

HIGH COURT

DA't ED:1310212026

\ oR thl: r l
.1. ?t ' 2Il ?s
.l
*
rf-C' *
Fr1'f 1
ORDER

WP.ll r.4494 of 2026

D!SPOSING OF THE / IRIT PETITION WI-'HOUT COSTS

/=,<br><br>{d
_t)
lx l ) A