✦ Telangana High Court · 05 Feb 2026

Dahra Spa and Salon v. The state of Telangana

Case at a glance

Outcome

Disposed of

In view of the said submissions, this Writ Petition is disposed of

Key paragraphs

  • Para 55. In view of the said submissions, this Writ Petition is disposed of in terms of the Common Order, dated28.09.2021 passed by this Court in W.P.No. 16281 of 2010 and batch. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall…

Judgment

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 appropriate writ, order or direction more preferably one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent in issuing the impugned Notification No. (L&O)/M41314012010, dated. 30 06.20 10 passed by the 2nd Respondent as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, violative of Artrcle 14, 19(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. lA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated rn the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of impugned Notification No (L&O)/M41314012010, dated.

30.06.2010 passed by the 2nd Respondent. pending dispc: al of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SMT. DHANA LAXMI REP. FOR t Rl N. SAIDA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: SRI M. SRINIVAS, ASST. GF .OR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER l/ TN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA ATHYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.3345 of 2026 DATE:05.02.2026 Between: I\4/s. Dahra Spa and Salon. The State of Telangana,, Rep by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, TS Secretariat buildings, Hyderabad and 3 others. AND ..Petitioner ORDER ...Respondents This writ petition is filed seeking following relief: "...to issuc an appropriate writ, order or direction more preferably one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent in issuing the impugned Notifrcation No.(L&O)/M4l3140/2010 dated 30.06.2010 passed by the 2nd Respondent as illegal, arbitrary, discnminatory, violative of Article la, l9(l)(g) of the Constitution of lndia contrary to the provisions of the Hyderabad City Police Act, 1348 Fasli and consequently set aside the same in the interest of justice. . . " 2 2- Heard Smt. Dhana Laxmi, learned counsel rcp esenting learned counsel for the petitioner on record and Mr.M.l rinivas, learned Assistant Govemment Pleader flor Home. Perused the record Contentions of learned counsel for the petitioner:

#3. Leamed counsel for the petitioner submits thil the petitioner is engaged in the buslness of providing solutions ftr all beauty and wellness needs such as saloon and spa. 'fhe petiti: rer is holding a valid registration certificate for running the business n the name and style of Dahra Spa and Salon.

3.1 . He further submits that the grievance of thc I etitioner is that basing on the impugned notification issued by the I ommissioner of Police, the Police are frequently interlering with th,: business of the petitioner and forcing the petitioner to close the said lusiness without following any due procedure of law. 3-2- lt is the contention of the learned counsel fbr th : petitioner that in similar set of facts and circumstances batch of w'i , petitions have been filed before this court and this court, disposec rf the said writ petitions vide Common Order, dated 2g.Og.2OZl, in W.p.Nos.162gl To, w. 3 of 2010 and batch. Stating so, she would seek to pass appropriate orders. Contentions of learned Assistant Government Pleader for Hom e:

#4. Learned Assistant Covernment Pleader for Home has not disputed the fact ofdisposal ofthe batch ofcases. Conclusion:

#5. In view of the said submissions, this Writ Petition is disposed of in terms of the Common Order, dated28.09.2021 passed by this Court in W.P.No. 16281 of 2010 and batch. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- P.PONNA KRISHNA ISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPYII SECTION OFFICER

#1. The Principal Secretary, Home Department, The state of Telangana, Dr.Br.Ambedkar Telangana State Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2. The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad City, Hyderabad. 3. The Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad Commissionerate, Gachibowli, Hyderabad.

#4. The Station House Officer, Raidurgam Darga Police Station, Raidurgam Darga, Ranga Reddy Diskict

#5. One CC to SRI N SAIDA RAO, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana [OUT] 7. Two CD Copies (Annex the copy of the Common Order in WP Nos.162B1 2R nO \ 'nr.{ of 2010 dated HIGH COURT DATED:0 510212026 ORDER WP.No.3345 of 2026 l c) t o., \ * 3 IHE SI4 ,J 1 J llqq ?ll.]q t I snzrrc DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS t rr1 1d, THE TIONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAI(SHMAN WRIT PETI TION Nos.I 628L aad 16419 of 2OtO 797 123L la76 ?rnd 2272 oI 2OL4 3O317 of 2Ot5 15413 15435 29229 2923L 30a4a 3312L 34409 40738 40787 ared 44939 of 2016 646, 6sq, 2955, 3zto7. I 1051, 20069. 2s90t.24920, 4tot2, 4132A 41355 aud 4L422 of 2Ol7 3442, I 7249. 2636'7, 26a22. 3447a, 3s307, 38617,39397. 399t7 39937 44044 44067 45592 and 45658 of 2O 18 2627,439% 3E9r,4447, raA6t r93s2, 20036 2t909 2L924 2t930, 22700, 23794 24674, 26410, 29LO7 aJrd. 29L2L of 2Ol9 347 7oa LAAT 1906 3589 472A 537E 2ooa9 20443 2L297 22334 225a4 22629 24040 240AL 24085 24334 24357 244Lo- 24657 24659 24660. 24662 alad 24673 of 2O2o 2442 336r 4473 4448 6595 66L4 aos0 130lo tL225 11350 14562 16431 20734 2275r 22761 22768 22815 23031 23361 aud 23a22 ot 2O21 It COMMON ORDER: Since the issue involved in all thesc Writ petitions is one and the same, they are being disposed of by this common order. 2- It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners in all the Writ Petitions and lcarned Government pleader for Home that the cntirc batch of these Writ petitions can be disposed of in terms of interim order daLed Oq.O2.2O2l in I.A.No.1 of 2O2O in W.P.No.2.141O ot 2O2O _

#3. In view of the submissions of learned counsel for both sides, these Writ Petitions are disposed o[ in terms of order dated O4.O2.2O21 in I.A.No.l of 2O2O in W.P.No.2441O of 2020, permitting the petitioners to run the massage centres, subject to maintaining a record in ihe register to be maintained by the massage cenLres containing the dates of visits of the customers, their narnes arrd r,erihable addresses together wirh the phone numbers, so as to enable t.Ile police // 'z to contact them on the aspect of the reqrr 'st to the owner/ man ager/ operator of t1.e massage centr(.s to provide for the help from the opposite sex. Further, it shal be open to any police oflrcer not below the rarlk of a Sr-r b I rSpector of Police attached to any police station to verify onc < in zr whrle such records maintained by the massage centres ,l icl he shall also be at liberty to verify as to whether th] particular customer has solicited alry such special servirr from the massage centre or not. It is also open to the lx,l cc to takc appropriate action depending upon the result ( { ar.ry such veriflcation and also considering the fact that \v r cthcr tl-re cross massage service provided to the custo I professional marrner or not. police ar-e also r investigate into crirnes, if arLy, reported aF r:r s is in rrtitled to lrnsr. the petitioners- Petitioners are also directed not to l<c(.1 the ntzrin door of the premises closed, during the wor I i rg ltou rs. Subject to these conditions, the petitioners may b: pennittcd to carry on the business, duly taking all necessary : nd prope r precautions to ensure that no incident o[ immoral .lctivit_v is carried on under the guise of providing whole bodv mass:lge. Miscellaneous petitions pending in all the Writ l,i titions, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as t ) costs. Date: 28.09 .2021 TJMR K. LAHf HMAN, J

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: In view of the said submissions, this Writ Petition is disposed of

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Constitution of India — art. 226; Hyderabad City Police Act; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 151.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Telangana High Court, on 05 Feb 2026. The bench was K LAHF HMAN.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Telangana High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Writ Petition No. 3345 of 2026). ← Search more judgments