140th Day Of Lockdown

Maharashtra53560136843518306 Tamil Nadu3086492506805159 Andhra Pradesh2445491547492203 Karnataka1886111055993398 Delhi1461341316574131 Uttar Pradesh126722767212120 West Bengal98459671202059 Bihar8274154139450 Telangana8075157586637 Gujarat71064542382652 Assam5883842326145 Rajasthan5249738235789 Odisha4592731785321 Haryana4163534781483 Madhya Pradesh3902529020996 Kerala3433121832109 Jammu and Kashmir2489717003472 Punjab2390315319586 Jharkhand185168998177 Chhatisgarh12148880996 Uttarakhand96326134125 Goa871259575 Tripura6161417641 Puducherry5382320187 Manipur3752204411 Himachal Pradesh3371218114 Nagaland30119738 Arunachal Pradesh223115923 Chandigarh1595100425 Meghalaya11154986 Sikkim9105101 Mizoram6203230
Related Stories

Hyderabad High Court declines card rooms in clubs

Published Feb 19, 2015, 1:20 pm IST
Updated Mar 29, 2019, 7:11 pm IST
The Madras HC has permitted the police to act against gamblers
Representational Picture (Photo: DC Archives)
 Representational Picture (Photo: DC Archives)

Hyderabad: The Hyderabad High Court has refused to grant relief to clubs in the city  who wanted the Hyderabad police prevented from interfering or obstructing in any manner from running card rooms on club premises where members and guests are allowed to play rummy (13 card game) with stakes.

Justice Vilas V. Afzulpurkar was dealing with a petition by the managements of Chiran Fort Club and nine others challenging the action of the police in closing their card rooms. The petitioners contended that in view of the declaration of the Supreme Court in the case of Kishan Chander versus state of Madhya Pradesh, the game of Rummy is not entirely a game of chance and is a game of skill. So the closure of card rooms by the police was illegal.


Venugopal, counsel for the home department of Telangana submitted that in a recent case the Madras High Court has ruled that in the event Rummy is played by members or guests of a club with stakes, the provisions of the Chennai Police Act are applicable.

The Madras HC has permitted the police to act against gamblers under the Chennai Police Act.

The verdict was challenged before the Supreme Court and it has granted a limited stay on the HC order to the extent of the petitioner club and decided to examine the matter in detail.
He said the Hyderabad city police has closed all card rooms after they found, during a series of raids on clubs, that members were playing Rummy with stakes. The police also seized cash at their instance.


He said that based on the evidence, the police had invoked the Hyderabad Gambling Act and closed the card rooms. He urged the court not to grant relief to the petitioners. While refusing interim relief, the judge said in view of new findings in a similar case by the SC and the Madras HC, the case needs a detailed examination to determine whether playing Rummy with stakes will attract provisions under the Gambling Act or not.

PIL seeks division of judicial staff

A PIL was moved in the Hyderabad High Court on Wednesday seeking a directive to the state and Central governments and the HC to take immediate steps to distribute the subordinate judicial officers and other judicial employees to Telangana and Andhra Pradesh states.


Senior High Court advocate Sarasani Satyam Reddy moved the PIL as a party in person stating that as per Section 77 of the AP Reorganisation Act, the services of officers of undivided AP have to be distributed between TS and AP.

In accordance with the section, allotment of officers of all cadres in all government departments have been made between the two states, except the officers of judicial services. No steps have been taken for the bifurcation of the subordinate judiciary till date, he added.

He said that the constitution of a separate High Court for AP was relevant for the purpose of the bifurcation of the subordinate judiciary. He challenged the notification issued by the High Court before the Reorganisation Act came into force to fill up junior civil judges posts and once the state is divided the said notification should have been shelved.


He submitted that the advocates of Telangana have always been discriminated in recruitment to judicial services. Mr Reddy also argued that there cannot be a common higher judicial service and judicial service for the two states and recruitment cannot be made by the High Court for subordinate judiciary without first dividing the subordinate judiciary as it is ultra vires to Article 233 and 234 of the Constitution.

Location: Telangana