lndus lnternational School Private Limited (lISPL) v. 1. The State of Telangana

Petitior under Article 22.6 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstance:; stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to is:;ue an order or direction, more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus b). i. Declaring the thirteen (13) impugned Vehicle Check Reports (VCRs) drawn and issued by the officers of Respondent No. 3 as illegal, arbitrary, untenable in law, in violation of princrples of natural justice and consequently quashing the same. ii. Declaring the inaction of the Respondent Nos. 5, g and g in not considering the complaints filed by the Petitioner against the Respondent No.2 and further refusing to register an FIR as completely arbitrary, erroneous and in violatiorr of their statutory duties, and consequently register an FIR against the Respondent No.2. iii. Direct the Respondent Nos. 4 to 10 to take cognizance of the high -handed and coercive steps taken by the Respondent No.2, in taking forceful posser;sion of the 15 buses during the subsistence of the lnterim order, and consequerrtly provide necessary police protection to the petitioners to ensure their saTety anc security. lA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 1s1 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fileJ in support of the writ petition, the High court may be pleased be i. Direct the Respondent Nos. 3 to 10, not to take any adverse action against the Petitioner and the buses in possession of the petitioner, pending disposal of the present writ pet tion. lA NO: 1 OF 20,15 Petition under Section '151 cPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filecl in support of the writ petition, the High court may be pleased be i. suspend the :hirteen (13) Vehicle check Reports dated 24.10.2025 drawn by the Respondent No. 3 and any adverse action in furtherance of the same, pending disposal of the present writ petition. Counselfor the Petitioner : M/s.TLH ADVOCATES AND SOLICITORS Counselfor the Respondents No.1,4to10 : ASST. GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondents No.2 : -- Counsel for the Respondents No.3 : ASST. GP FOR TRANSPORT The Court made the following: ORDER HOI,JOUI(ABLIj SRI IUSTICE N.V.SI{RAVAN I(UMAR WRIT PETIT'ION No.33411, of 2025 ORDER: I ieard learnecl counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Go'ertttuent Pleacler for l{ome appcaring for res}'rouclent Nos"l' 4 to 10 and learncrl Assis.ant. Go'u'er:nrr.rent Plt:atler for'l'ransport appearing for resl'rontlt:nt Ntr.3. lVittr their corrsent, this writ pctition is bcirls takett up for c-iisprosal at the itclmission stage itself.

2. I'his n,rii petition has been iilcrl stckir-rg to tleclare (i) the thirtcen 13 irnpulpccl Vchicle Check Reportt; (\l(-I{s) cit'ar.t,t1 zrtrcl issuccl bt' tI-rc officers of resp'rouclerrt No.3 as illegal, ari;:ii'ar1', trntenablc irr Iarv, in violation of prirrciprle5 of natural justice arnd consequenth' quash the samc (ii) ttre inaction c>t the resprsndent Nos.5, B and 9 in not consiclering the complaints filed by the pc.titioner agairst the respondent No.2 and t'urther refusing trt rcgister an FIR as conrpletell, ; r6i,aar),, erroneous and in violation ol' tlreir statutttrv cluties antl cclrrsecluently register an FIR against tltc respont'lent No.2 (iii) to clirect t{re responc{ent Nol;.4 to L0 to take cognizance of the l"ri11h hancletl and coercive steps taken by the respondent No.2 in taking forceful possession of the 15 buscs ciuring the subsistence of the interirn orcler clatecl 16.09.2025 in COP No,1-l't of 2025 and consequently f'rrovicle necessarv police pnrtection tt-r the petitioners to er.sure their safety and security.

3. l'he learned Assistant' Goverrrmcnt Pleaclcr for l-Iorne appearing for res|'ronclsnt' No;.1, 4 to 10 placccl on r:ccclrd instntctions issued br,' Sub- lnspector of Police, Miyapur Police .Station, C),berabacl Cornmissionerate, f ( wllerein it is stated that petitioner on 78.08.2025 lodged a complaint 2 respondent No.9, against the pubtic nuisance, intirniclation and obstructions made by the representation of respondent No.2. On such complaint, GD entry tt i d.e p etition No. CY B / MP U R-C Y B / 79 0825 / 03722da re d 19 .OB.2O2S, wa s rna cl e and during the course rtf the enquiry, it n,as rerrealer'l that the dispute is civil in nature' Flence, orr 30.09.2025, the petitioner's con-rplaint dated 18.08.2025 was closed as 'Civir in Nature', suggesti'g the petitioner to approach the competgnt Civ, Court for redressar of rris grievance and the same was comrnunicated to tire ptcti tioner. 4' Recording the subrnissions made by rearnec{ counser appearing on either side, wit hou!.expressing anv opinion on the merits of the case and since the pefitioner,s complaint daterl 1g.0g.2025is closed as ,Civil Court deems it appropriafe to c-rispose of trre writ petition gran,ng libe,rty to petitioner to seek appropriate remecly as available unclc.r law. 5. Witfr the above observafi in Nature,, this .costs. :::,,.::^;'-: .::,..:,:::,, : i \ fo, //TRUE COPYII ABD SECTION OFFICER

1. One CC to M/s.TLH 2. Two CCs to:Gp ADVOCATES FOR HOME, High

3. il[f"P"?:i:36o^ rRRws

4. Two CD Copies AND SOLI Court for the State Advocate loPucl of Telanga na [OUU PORT, High Court for th e State of Telangana BSK BS b\ HIGH COURT DATED i}4l1'112025 t t I J HES 1 C) 2 0 f i:B 2026 * * ORDER WP.No'33411 of 2025 I I I E w Rrr P Er rr I o N ?lif,f.='l+ ? S#J *,s %