Soma Archana Reddy, v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: K.LAKSHMAN
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2024-12-30. Soma Archana Reddy, v. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal. Read the...
Judgment text
I 3168 I I HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA I AT HYDERABAD (Special Ori ginal"tlurisdiction) IVONDAY ,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION NO: 532 OF 2014 Between: Soma Archana Reddy, W/o. Dr Soma Gautam Reddy, Aged about 30 years, Occ House Wife, R/o. 6, Brigside Gardens, Lankshire, Scot Land United Kingdom. Represented by her Power of Attorney K. Pradeep Reddy, Sio. Late K. Janardhan Reddy Aged 63 Yrs, Occ Business, RJo. '176, Shantiniketan, Mahendra Hills, East Maredpally, Secunderabad. ... 'ET. T'ONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal, Secretary, I\,4unicipal Administration and Urban Development, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, rep by its, Commissioiner and Special Officer, Tank Bund, Hyderabad. 3 The Zonal Commissioner, GHIVC, Malkajgti Zone, Malkajgiri, Hyderabad, 4 The Deputy Commissioner, GHMC, Malkalgiri, Hyderabad.
5 Chief City Planner, Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad 6 Reliance Jio lnfocomm Limited, C/o. Reliance Communications Limted, 6th Floor, Lakeshore Apartments, Raj Bhavan Road, Hyderabad. 7 Sri l,4. Raghuramaiah, S/o. Ganganna, aged about 59 Years, Rl/o. Plot No-S, Wesley Girls High School and Junior Collge Employees Co-operative Housing Society, Malkajgiri Village, Vallabh Nagar Taluk, Ranga Reddy District. ... RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other writ, order or direction declaring the inaction of the Respondent No. s'1 to 5 herein in not discharging their statutory duties by initiating action against the illegal construction and erection of cell tower being undertaken by the 6th respondent in 7th respondents premises in Plot No.
S, Wesley Girls High School and Junior College Employees Co-operative Housing Society, East Maredpally, Malkajgiri Village, Secunderabad, in exercise of their duties under the provisions of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 as being challenged as illegal, arbitrary and / unconstitutional. apart from being contrary to provisions of Hyderabad IVunicipal Corporation Act, 1955 and G. O. Ms. No. 380 dated 1-08-2013 and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 5 to demolish iFE iilegat construction and installation being undertaken by the 6th & 7th respondents LA. NO: 1 OF 20'14(WPMP. NO: s93 OF 2014) Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 6th & 7th respondents not to make any further construction for the purpose of erection of a cellular tower at Plot No.
5, Wesley Girls High School and for Junior College Employees Co-operative Housing Society, East Maredpally, IVlalkajgiri Village, Secunderabad pending disposal of the writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. P. SRI HARSHA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No. 1: GP FOR MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2to4: SRI CHATLA MADHU, SC FOR GHMC Counsel for the Respondent No. 5: SRI J. N. BHUSHAN Counsel for the Respondent No. 6:'SRl N. MANIKANTA REP SRI P. HEMACHANDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No. 7:- The Court made the following: ORDER I HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAXSHMAN WRIT PETITION No. 532 OF 2014 ORAL ORDER: Sri N. Manikanta, learned ,:ritrnsei representing Sri P. Hemachandra Reddy, le:ar-ned counsel for respondent No. 6 on instructions would submit that there is no proposal for respondent No. 6 to erect the cell tower. In the light of the aforesaid submission, this writ petition is dismissed as infructuous.
There shail be no order as to costs. As a sequei, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition shall sta-nd cl. osed. SD/- T. JAYASREE ASSIS NT REGISTRAR I //TRUE COPY// S CTI ON OFFICER To. '-'1. IOPUCI On" CC to SRl. P. SRI HARSHA REDDY' Advocate AND URBAN [qn,tlr'its-rterloN 2. Two ccs to GP Foilillji'iiblijer- UT] 5i+"- ;r relansa na' at Hv{e'rabad [o D EVE LoP M ENT, H is'il"b; ;;ibi i-n" [oPUC] 3. one cc to sRl. P. Htl;'ACiANone 3lqqv^Advocate ;. 6nE dd i; siii. *rniiA MAonu, sc FoR^GHMC [oPUC] ;. 6;; 6d i; 5iii. l. r't. aHusHnN, Advocate toPUCI 6. Two CD CoPies BM GJP z I HIGH COURT DATED:3011212024 ORDER WP. No. 532 of 2014 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTOUS WITHOUT COSTS / /,< , i :
Source: High Court for State of Telangana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.