MIIAMO THE SPA v. The State of Telangana
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
sides, these Writ Petitions are disposed of in terms of order
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India arts. 14, 19(1)(g)
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 s. 151
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. sides, these Writ Petitions are disposed of in terms of order dated 04.02.2021 in I'A.No. I of 2O2O in W'P'No'24410 of 2O2O , perrnitting the petitioners to run the massage centres, subject to maintaining a record in the register to be maintained by the…
Judgment
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 toissueanappropriatewrit, orderordirectionmorepreferablyoneinthenatureof writ of Mandamus directing the action of Respondents Police officials and officers of soT in interfering with lawful business of petitioner shops under the guise of impugnednotificationNo.(L&o)Ma/3lp; olzo1o'dated30.06.2010passedbythe2nd respondent and forcing the petitioners to secure similar orders from this Hon',ble court as passed in w. P. No 16281 of 2010 and batch though there is no violation committed by the petitioners in running their sPA wellness centre as arbitrary illegal and unconstitutiona I and violative of Articles 14, 19(1) (g) of the constitution of lndia and direct the respondents and their officers not to interfere in the day to day business of petitioner shops. l.A. NO: 1 OF 2 026 Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the respondents 2 to 4 and their officers not to interfere in the business of petitioners, pending disposal of the above Writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRt REVELLI RAMANJANEyULU Counsel for the Respondents: SRI M.SRINIVAS, AGp FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL trIRIT PETITION No.18OO6 of2O26 Date:12.06.2026 Between: Miiamo the Spa And ..Petitioner The State of Telangana, ReP. bY its Principal Secretary, Home Department, T.S. Secretariat, Hyderabad, TG-500004 and others ..Respondents ORDER: This Writ Petition is hled seeking the following relief:- "....to issue an appropiate tuit' order or direction more preferablg one in the nature of Wnt of Mandomus directing the action of Respondents Police Officiols and Officers of SOT in interfering uith tauful business of petitioner sLtops under the guise of impugned notification No. (L&O) M4/3140/2010, dated 30.06.2010 passed by the 2"d respondent and forcing the petitioners to secure similar ord.ers from this Honourable Court as passed in W' P. No 16281 of 2010 and- batch tlnugh there is no uiolation committed bg the petitioners in running their SPA Wellness Centre os arbitrary, illegot and unconstitutional and uiolatiue of Arttctes 14, 1g(1) (g) of tLE Constitution of India and d.irect the respondents and their offcers not to interfere in the dag to dag business of petitioner shops and grant such other necessary relief or reliek as this Hon'bte Court mag d.eem fit and. proper in the circumstances of the case'' Heard Sri Revelli Ramanjaneyulu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri M. Srinivas, learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for the 2 appearlng Assistant 2 official respondents and with their consent, this writ petition is being taken up for disposal at the admission stage.
#3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is engaged in the business of providing solutions for all beauty and wellness needs such as saloon and spa. The petitioner is holding valid registration certificates for runnrng his business in Hyderabad. It is further submitted that the respondents visited the SPA Centre and asked the petitioner whether he has an order from this Court to run the business as this Court had decided similar issues in the order, dated 28.09.2021 in W.P.No. 16281 of 2010 and batch, wherein this Court issued the following directions:- "ln view of the submissions of learned counsel for bo1,h sides, these Writ Petitions are disposed of in terms of order dated 04.02.2021 in LA.No.1 of 2O2O in W.P.No.2441O of 2O2O, permitting the petitioners to run the massage centres. subject to maintaining a record in the register to be maintained by the massage centres containing the dates of visits of the customers, their names and verifiable addresses together with rhe phone numbers, so as to enable the police to contact them on the aspect of the request to the owner/ manager/ operator of the massage centres to provide for the help from the cpposite sex. Further, it shall be open to any police officer not below the rank of a Sub-lnspector of Police attached to any police station to verify once in a while such records maintzLined by the massage centres and he shall also be at liberty to ,.,erify as to u'hether the Particular customer has solicited any such special service from the massage centre or not. It is also open to the police to- tdle appropriate action depending upon the 3 result of any such verification and also considering the fact that whether the cross massage service provided to the customers is in professional manner or not. Police are also entitled to investigate into crimes, if any, reported against the petitioners. Petitioners are also directed not to keep the main door of the premises closed, during the working hours. Subject to these conditions, the petitioners may be permitted to carry on the business, duly taking all necessary and proper precautions to ensure that no incident of immoral activity is carried on under the guise of providing whole body massage. Miscellaneous petitions pending in all the Writ petitions, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs" It is stated that the petitioner is already implementing the directions of this Court and there is no deviation from the same in whatsoever manner, yet the respondents are insisting to secure an order from this Court to continue the business. Questioning the same, the present Writ petition is hled.
#4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home has submitted that without obtaining any permission from the municipal authorities as well as GST as required under law, the petitioner is operating his business activities. He further { ( submitted that the respondents are not interfering with the business activities of the petitioner and the respondents would follow the directions issued by this Court in the order, dated 2a.O9.2021 in W.P.No.1628t of 2010 and batch.
#5. In view of the said submissions, this Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the petitioner to follow the directions 4 issuecl by this Court in the order clated 2g.O9.2021 in W.P.No. 76281 of 201O and batch. However, this order does not preclude the respondents to ensure that the petitioner is follou'ing the directions issued by this Court in W.I,.No.162g 1 of 2010 and batch, and if any deviation is observed, the respondents police may take appropriate steps strictly in accorr.lancc rvith law, and if any complaint rs made against the petitioner, the petitroner shall cooperate with the enquiry with the respondenl s police. Needless to mention, it is open to the petitioner to obtarn permission from the aulhorities i.e., Munir:ipal and GST and to comply with the order passed by this Court dated 28.O9.2O21 in W.p.No 16281 of 2010 and batch. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. No costs \ To, //TRUE COPY// SD/. C.DEEPIKA ASSTSTANT TEG|STRAR secrffiorrrcen The Principal Secretary, Home Department, T S secretariat' Hyderabad' State of Telangana-500004 The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad Commissionerate' Road No 12' Bhavani Nagar, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, Telangana 500034' The Assistant Commissioner of Police, ACP Asif Nagar Division,2nd floor, niit ttaga,. police station, beside olive hospital, Asif Nagar, Hyderabad- 500028 Telangana TheStationHouseofficer'MasabTankpoliceStation, Shantinagarpolice quarters, Ac Guards, masab tank Hyderabad, Telangana 500028 One CC to SRI REVELLI RAMANJANEYULU, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT] Two CD Copies 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 (Along with the copy of order dated 28.09.2021, in W'P'No.16281 of 2010 & batch) \J HIGH COURT DATED: 1210612026 ORDER t'r E S fa\{ WP.No.18006 of 2026 L) 1B 7 [20 *^ "--'-l['qr-"-",a,- '..-.H :lr -- .a: DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS \ b6 ,i $ THE HOIiIOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION Nos. 15281 and 16419 of2O1O 797 t23t 1876 and 2272 of 2014 303 17 of2O15: 29231 30848 33121 38409 4073'4 15413 15435 29229 4O7A7 and 44939 of 2O1 6 646,658, 2955 .3407. 11051 ,2@69 .25901.2a92o 4tot2. 4L324 41355 and 41422 of2OL7 3.4a2, 17249,26367.26A22,34474.35307.38617. 39397. 39917 39937 440,44 440,67 45592 and 45658 of 2O18 2627, 4399,3891 .447,18 86L, L93s2.20()36, 2L9o9, 21924.21930. 2270,0.23794.24674. 26410.29LO7 atd 29121 of 2Ol9 3,47.7o8. 1887, 1906,3589 4724. 5378. 20089.20,443 21297 .22338' 225A4,226 29, 24o,ao.24081. 240'45, 24334. 243s7.2MlO, 24657.24659,2 4660..24662 and24673 of 2O2Oz 24A2.3361,4473.44A4,659 5,6614 .8050. 13010 11225. 11350 .14s62, t643t.2073,4 o2751.22761.22764.22415. 230,31,23361 and 23A22 of2O2l COMMON ORDER: Since the issue involved in all these Writ Petitions is one and the same, they are being disposed of by this common order. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the 2. petitioners in ail the Writ Petitions and learned Government Pleader for Home ttrat the entire batch of these Writ Petitions can be disposed of in terms of interim order dated 04.O2.2O21 in I.A.No.1 of 2O2O in W.P.No.244lO of 2O2O. 2 In vierv of the submissions of learned counsel for both
#3. sides, these Writ Petitions are disposed of in terms of order dated 04.02.2021 in I'A.No. I of 2O2O in W'P'No'24410 of 2O2O , perrnitting the petitioners to run the massage centres, subject to maintaining a record in the register to be maintained by the massage centres containing the dates of visits of the customers, their names and verifiable addresses together r,l'ith the phone numbers, so as to enable the police to contact them on the aspect of the request to the orvner/ manager/ operator of the massage centres to provide lor the help from the opposite sex' Further, it shall be open to any police oflicer not below the rank of a Sub-Inspector of Police attached to any police station to verify once in a while such records maintained by the massage centres and he shall a-lso be at liberty to verify as to u,hether the particular customer has solicited any such special service from the massage centre or not' It is also open to the police to take appropriate action depending upon the result of any such verification and also considering the fact that whether the cross massage service provided to the customers is in professional marlner or not' 3- Police are also entitled to investigate into crimes, if any, reported against the petitioners. Petitioners are a-lso d.irected not to keep the main door of the premises closed, during the working hours. Subject to these conditions, the petitioners may be permitted to carry on the business, duly taking all necessary and proper precautions to ensure that no incident of immoral activity is carried on under the guise of providing whole body massage. Miscellaneous petitions pending in all the Writ Petitions, if any, shall stand closed. There sha-Il be no order as to costs. Date:28.O9.2021 TJMR K. LAKSHMAN, J
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: sides, these Writ Petitions are disposed of in terms of order
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — arts. 14, 19(1)(g); Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 151.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Telangana High Court, on 12 Jun 2026. The bench was K LAKSHMAN.
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.