IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION Nos.24362, 21365 & 22874 of 2019

17^th Feburary, 2026 WRIT PETITION No.24362 of 2019 Between:

Mohammed Amer Hussain …Petitioner AND The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat at Hyderabad and 9 Others.

…Respondents WRIT PETITION No.21365 of 2019 Between:

Mohammed Firdous and another …Petitioners AND The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat at Hyderabad and 9 Others.

…Respondents WRIT PETITION No.22874 of 2019 Between:

Mohd Mahboob Patel and another …Petitioners AND The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat at Hyderabad and 9 Others.

…Respondents

COMMON ORDER:

Since the issue involved in all the three cases is identical, these three Writ Petitions are being disposed of by way of this common order.

2. For the sake of convenience and to avoid repetition of facts, Writ Petition No. 24362 of 2019 is taken up as the lead case, and the facts therein are referred to for the purpose of adjudication of all the connected writ petitions. The prayer in this petition is as hereunder:

“…to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondent no 4 to 10 in threatening and not allowing the petitioners into the Rajeev Gandhi International Airport Hyderabad at Shamshabad to do their business of taxi driving and picking and dropping the passengers, and also issuing false challans for no wrong committed and threatening of booking false criminal cases, detention and taking into illegal custody of the vehicles in connivance of the Respondent no 10 in binding over the petitioners for no cause and reason as illegal, arbitrary and against the law and also in violation of the fundamental rights and the constitution guarantees contained in Article 14, 19 Article 300 A of the constitution of India amounting to overreaching of the powers and consequently issue a direction not to arrest, detain, bind over and stop the petitioners from carrying on their business of running taxis in the premises of RGIA International Airport and pass.......”

3. None appears for the petitioners.

4. Heard Mr.D.Pradeep, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondents.

5.1. Learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that the allegation that the respondent-police authorities have seized the vehicles of the petitioners and prevented them from entering the premises of the Rajiv Gandhi International Airport, Hyderabad, thereby interfering with their taxi business, is unfounded. It is further submitted that the police are discharging their duties strictly within the parameters of law and, wherever required, are acting in accordance with Section 207 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which empowers authorized officers to seize and detain vehicles used in contravention of the provisions of the Act.

5.2. It is specifically contended that the vehicles of the petitioners were never seized by the police and that the petitioners were not obstructed from entering the airport premises. It is also stated that certain vehicles referred to in the writ petition were originally registered as transport (taxi) vehicles and were subsequently converted for personal use. In the absence of any substantiating material, it is urged that the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

6. I have perused the material available on record.

7. The grievance of the petitioners is that the respondent- police authorities are interfering with their taxi business by allegedly seizing their vehicles and restricting their entry into the airport premises. On the other hand, the explanation offered by the respondents is that no such seizure has been effected and that the police are acting strictly in accordance with statutory powers, particularly under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and o