IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN WRIT APPEAL No.90 of 2026 DATE: 11.02.2026 BETWEEN:

Mohd. Zaheeruddin ….Appellant AND The State of Telangana and 10 others ….Respondents

JUDGMENT

The present Writ Appeal, filed under Clause 15 of the letters Patent, arising out of the order dated 25.11.2025 rendered by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.24449 of 2025. By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge dismissed the said writ petition filed by the appellant herein. The said writ petition was filed by the appellant herein to challenge the illegality and propriety of the removal order issued by the State Government under G.O.Rt.No.65 dated 07.08.2025.

Factual background (in brief)

2. The appellant was appointed as Government Additional Qazi for Qazzat, Qile Mohammed Nagar, Hyderabad, vide G.O.Ms.No.2 dated 07.02.2008 under Section 2 of the Kazis Act, 1880 (for short, ‘the Act’). On 07.02.2025, a show-cause notice was issued proposing his suspension based on allegations that his Naib Qazis were involved in performing child marriages and other illegal activities. The notice also referred to a common judgment of this Court dated 30.09.2024 in W.P.Nos.38879 of 2022 and 34194 of 2017, directing the Government to take action under Section 2 of the Act. The appellant submitted a detailed explanation on 24.02.2025 denying the allegations and highlighting that all criminal cases against his Naib Qazis had ended in acquittal.

3. Separately, a show-cause notice dated 03.08.2023 was issued alleging that the appellant had issued a divorce certificate (Talaq Raj'ah) within the iddat period, contrary to Shariah law. The appellant replied on 22.08.2023 explaining that the certificate was legally issued under Islamic Law.

4. Without conducting any further inquiry, the State Government issued G.O.Rt.No.65 dated 07.08.2025 removing the appellant from the post of Additional Qazi with immediate effect under Section 2 of the Act.

5. The appellant challenged the removal order before the learned Single Judge on the grounds of violation of natural justice, lack of evidence, absence of misconduct and procedural irregularity. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition, primarily holding that:

i. The appellant, being the appointing authority for Naib Qazis, was vicariously liable for their acts.

ii. Show-cause notices were issued, hence principles of natural justice were complied with.

iii. The allegations of child marriages and illegal divorce certificates constituted misconduct.

iv. The Government had sufficient material to exercise its power under Section 2 of the Act.

6. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant has filed the present writ appeal.

7. Heard Sri A.M.Qureshi, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri Sultan Mohiuddin, learned counsel for the appellant; Sri Ananthula Ravinder, learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3; Sri A.Venkatesh, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri P.Pandu Ranga Reddy, learned counsel for respondent Nos.4 and 5 and Sri V.M.M.Chary, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.6 to 11 and perused the record.

Submissions of learned counsel for the appellant

8. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant advanced the following submissions:

i. That the removal was effected without any departmental inquiry, without examination of witnesses, and without supplying documents relied upon. The show-cause notices did not specify the alleged misconduct attributable to the appellant personally.

ii. The Kazis Act, 1880, does not create vicarious criminal or disciplinary liability. The appellant cannot be held liable for the acts of Naib Qazis appointed under Section 3, especially when they have been acquitted by criminal Courts.

iii. That the Act does not define ‘misconduct’. The allegations of child marriages and issuance of divorce certificates do not amount to misconduct under the