The High Court · 2025

partner Mr. Deorattey occ. Business, above , 500 003. T' by its Principal Secretary, Home Touer-A, ICCC Building, Road Commissioner of Police, 10-24151416, Street Number 1, Gandhi Nagar Colony, West Manedpally, Secunderabad, Telangana

4. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, CFPR C98, Subhash Rd, near Ujiaini Gunj, OId Gudi, Old Bhoiguda, Rani

5. The Station House Officer, Nallagutta, Secu PS, 1, Mahatma Gandhi Rd, Hyderabad, Telangana 5fi)003 ...RESPONDENTS i Petition under Article 226 of the Coristitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ or Order or Direction, particularly one in nature of Writ of Mandamus, questioning the inaction of the Respondent No. 5 in not considering the Petitioner's representation dated 17-09-2025 and coming for inspection of smoking area in acrordance with the COTPA (Cigarcttes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act), 2OO3 as well as allowing the Petitioner herein to s,:rve hookah to his clientele in the cafe' named Lucifer by HP at 1t-8-22917 above .Vijetha Supermarket, Sindhi Colony, Begumpet, Hyderabad,

500003. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI OMAR A PASHA Gounset for the Respondents: SRt G. ANIKETH REDDY, AGP FOR HOME , The Court made the following: ORDER

1...\o THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR OR,DER: Nos.L to 5. With the consent of the parties, this writ petition is being taken up for disposal at the admissionstage itself.

2. This writ petition has been filed seeking the following prayer:- "to declare tlw inaction of ttu Respondcnt No5 in rct onsideing the Petitioners representation dated L7.09.2025 and umtng for inspectiott of smoking nren in accordane zoith the COTPA (Cigarettes and Otlur Tobacco Proclucts Prohibition of Ailoerti*mrnt and Regulation of Trade and Comnterce, Procluction, Sufuly and l)istribution Act 2003) as u,ell as allou,ing the Pdtitioner lrcrein to soe hmlcah to ltis clientele in tlu cnfe nonnd Luci{er by HP at L-S-2291 abooe Vijethn Supermarlcc t, Sindli C-olony, Begumpet, Ilyderabnd 50W3.'

3. Brief facts stated in this writ petition ane that petitioner b a coffee shop running under name and style "The Lucifer by l#',having its premises at 1- 8-229 /7,above Vijetha Supermarke! Sindhi Colony, Begumpet, Hyderabact

500003. The petitioner submits that it has obtained required permits including trade license and registration certificate .fr", + Labour Department, Government of Telangana. It is furttrer sutxnitted that as Per the COTPA Act, the petitioner coffee shopr has a designated space/area for the purpose of smoking as r,r,ell as the same is under CCTV surveillance. The case of the petitioner is that on 17.09.2025, petitioner made a rePresentation anC \ \ f---"-"--.-.,, -/ i" () 2 - . :' requested respondent No.S to inspect the subject property and permit the petitioner to serve hookah to his customers. Howeve& tlie same is still pending. Aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is filed.

4. Iearned counsel for the petitioner restricts his prayer seeking a direction to respondent authorities to dispcse the petitioney's representation dated l7.0g.2}25and pass appropriate orders.

5. Leerned Assistant Government pleader for Home appearing for responderrts submits that if the petitioner's representation dated 1tZ.Og.zO?S is still pending for consideration; the respondent authorities rnay be directed to , dispose of the said representation and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. 6- Heard and perused the material available on record. On perusal of the certificate of Registratioir issued by the l,abour Department, Government of Telangana, it is noticed that the nature of petitioner's business is shown as "Coffee shlp and Restaurant". on perusal of License issued under FSS Act, 20[16 by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India, it is noticed that the food product category to be served at the petitioner coffee shop is classified to prepared foods, confectionery, dairy products, bakery products, beverages etc.

7. In the case on hand, it is relevant to refer to the paragraph No.5 of the order dated 08.12.2022 passed by this Court in w.p.No.1s944- of 20?2 and the sarne is extracted hereunder:- iE) C) \ \ 3 "5, Tlrere cannot be ony dispute with regard to tlu fact tlat poltce llave the power to regulate smoking in a public place tn the inanner specifrcd, as provided under Sections 4 & 12 of tlrc'Act. In sQime cases,'the wtiiers ofltrc restaurants contend that they have liceince from GHMC.:'TIbugh they harc a trade licence from GHIa{C, ukimately, as per'{he power conferred under the Act, it is the respective police who hbe the authority to regulate and monitor. Further, tlu object of tle Act is to prohibit consumption of cigarette and other tobarco products which are tnjurious to health and in the larger interest of improving tlrc public health, as per Article 47 of the Constitution of hdia wliih deals with the duty of the State to protect the public health. It is also oibserved that most of the restaurants which obtained trade licence for the purpose of running a restaurant or cafeteria are converting the same tnto hookah parlours for running hoolah centres. As per Seciion 4 of the Act, a separate place is required to be maintained for restaurants which have the capacity of 30 seats, that ipso facto wtll not gle any rigltt to the restaurant owners to run the hookah parlours. At the place of stnking, except smoking, no other service slnll be allowed and if basing on the permission granted fo, a restaurant, they are only runntng.Inokah centres, the authorities have a right to cancel the licence.,Iwartably, the police have to have constant check and conffol whether the concerrud -are following the provisions of the Act and the Rules and whether they are displaying statutory and pictorial warning notices. As per Section I2 of the COTP Act, the police not below the rank of Sub-Inspector or any fficer of State Food or Drug Administration or any other oflicer, holding the equivalent rank being not below the rankof SubJrapector of Police, authorised by tlrc Central Government or by tlre State Government can inspect any building In view of the same, there cannot be any direction.from this Court to the respondents rot to visit lnolcah centres of the petitioner. It hos come to light tlnt under the guise of hoolah parlour, in some cases, they are getting the customers used to the other narcotic drugs. Even on lhat ground also, there shouU be constant surveillance qnd check by the police. There slnuld be a Jtne balance from tlrc respondent police where they can only interfere in tlrc business when there is a statutory violation or any ircidents tlat are contrary to law are taking place in the wid premises, bA uider the guise of it, the police just like that canrutt lrurass the persons wlo are running the hookth centres. If there is any htgh-harded actbn on tlw port of the offcer, the same can be brought to the notice of the hryher autlnrities and the higher autlrcrities shall take actton. The petitioner shall earmark exclusively a seryrote area with opproprtate enclosure in the hotel prernises and no otJrcr orea or portion of the premises sholl be used by the customers of the petitiorcr for smoking inokalt.

8. It is also relevant to rcfer to the corrunon order dated 75.71.2023 passed in W.P.Nos.8223 of 2013 and batch, relevant portion is extracted.trereunder:- I 4 "itl) Since the Hyderabad City Police Act, I34g Fasli confCrs power over tfui amwemen! Centres/restaurants which are deJined as .pibltc place. ,!r,f:! th!-COTP Act and as per Rule 4 of the piohibition of Smofing in Public-Places Rules, 2008 permission is required specffing ,*ohng are;a. Therefore, to establish hookah ce tes, the petitioniis sn il obtain tncessary permissionfrom the concerned authority urrder the provisions of ,he City Police Act." o

9. Havrng considered the above facb and circumstances and recording the submissions made by the Iearned counsel on either side, this writ petition is dispos<:d of directing the respondent authorities to dispose the petitionefs representrtion d ated' [email protected])s, secking permission to run his cafe and in the light of o'der dated' B.r2.i{J22pessed in w.p.No.r59rK of 2022 andcorunon order dated 75.77.2023 passed in W.p.Nos.g223 of. 2013., respondent authoritie* are directed tc pass appropriate orders strictry in accordance with Iaw and communicate the same to the petitioner. It is made crear that this Court had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case, it is for the responden'i authorities to pass orders for permission strictry in accordance withlaw. 10' Actc'rdingly this writ petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous applicatioru;, if any pending, shall stantl closed. No order as to costs. / To,

1. The

2. Cornm No. 12,

3. The 6 SECTION OFFICER Secretary, Home Department, The State of Telangana, /

6. 7 8. PVL PSK ]f9 Aqsigtant Commiss.ioner of police, CFPR Cgg. Sut "BXatiS{'ff"?Igf gg,i#,!h:?Tf :"-;i:??"ssr3sr',.-br;dd;"dfi rne station House officer, Ramooparp.et.ps, 1, Mahatma G_andhi Rd, Hil'fl [1?B{'6[AH:i.B.i'61iff 'r3d;Hiiarbal,+:tffi H1;otb?i5' ron Houe'Iiiirii ilraa;tE slitL or reransana. [oUrJ IWS 3$'"'Srcp ,4i / HIGH COURT TE i22109t2025 \ \ F tr WP.No.28760 of 2025 \ \ \ lHE S ,I 6 f,rAR 21126 * *