Af And Ns Foods Private Limited vs. State Of Telangana

Facts

The petitioner, operating a coffee shop, sought a writ of mandamus to prevent the Station House Officer, Gachibowli, from interfering with their business of offering flavored hookah in a designated smoking area. The petitioner contended that their activity was in line with Supreme Court guidelines and the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade Commerce Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003 (COTP Act, 2003). The respondents, including the State of Telangana and various police authorities, were the opposing parties. The present writ petition was filed seeking to dispose of the matter in terms of a common order previously passed by the High Court in a batch of writ petitions (W.P.No.8223 of 2013 and batch).

Held

The Court noted that the issue raised in the present writ petition was squarely covered by a common order previously passed by the High Court in W.P.No.8223 of 2013 and batch, dated 15.11.2023. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, appearing for the respondents, did not dispute this fact. Consequently, the Court disposed of the present writ petition in terms of the aforementioned common order. The common order in W.P.No.8223 of 2013 and batch, which dealt with similar issues concerning hookah parlors, had laid down specific conditions for operating such establishments, including obtaining necessary licenses and permissions, prohibiting service to minors, displaying health warnings, and allowing police supervision for violations of the COTP Act and the Hyderabad City Police Act. The ratio decidendi is that if a matter is covered by a previous judgment of the same court, it should be disposed of in terms of that judgment. The operative direction was to dispose of the writ petition in terms of the common order.

Key Issues

1. Whether the action of the 5th Respondent in interfering with the business activity of offering flavored hookah in a designated smoking area, as per Supreme Court guidelines, is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, and violative of the Petitioner's rights under Article 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India? The Petitioner argued that their business of serving flavored hookah in a designated smoking area adheres to the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court and the provisions of the COTP Act, 2003. They contended that police interference was unwarranted and violated their fundamental right to conduct business. The Petitioner relied on previous orders of the High Court in similar matters. The Respondents, represented by the Assistant Government Pleader for Home, did not dispute the Petitioner's submission that the issue was covered by a previous common order of the Court.