Surigala Kalamma and 9 Others v. The State of Telangana and 6 Others

Court: High Court for State of Telangana

Bench: K.LAKSHMAN

Judgment date: 2024-12-26

Case summary

High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2024-12-26. Surigala Kalamma and 9 Others v. The State of Telangana and 6 Others. Read the judgment and...

Judgment text

[ 3168 ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY,THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION NO: 17463 OF 2020 Between: '1 . Surigala Kalamma , Wo. Dasharatha, Ag-ed 38 years, Occ. Household, Rl/o' -Bus H. N6. 2-132, Angadi Bazar, Old Stand, Mothkur Mandal, Yadadribhuvanagiri District. 2. Kowalakari Nar6nder, S/o. Ramulu, Aged 47 years, Occ. Business, Rl/o -Bus U. f. l6. Z-tOa, Angadi Bazar, Old Stand, Mothkur Mandal, Yadadribhuvanagiri District. 3. Renukuntla KotaTah, S/o. Venkatnarayna, Aged 48 years, Occ. Business, Rl/o. H. No. 6-93, Angadi Bazar, olci Bui Stand, Mothkur Mandal, Yadad ribhuvanagiri District. 4. Kattekola Mahelh, S/o. Narsaiah, Aged 31 years, Occ. Business, Rl/o. - Mandal, H. No. 3-68, Angadi Bazar, Old Bus Stand, Mothkur Yadad ribhuvanagiri District. 5. Saini Shyam, S7o. Narayana, Aged 67 years, Occ.. Business,.! 9r7;t65' Anoadi Bizar.

Old Bus Stlnd, Mothkur Mandal, Yadadribhuvanagiri District. 6. Bedarakota Vijay, S/o. Vittal, Aged 40 years, Occ. Business, R/o. H. No. 7-164' gus Anoadi Bazar. 'Citd Stand, Mothkui Mandal, Yadadribhuvanagiri District. 7. Avi"shetti Somaiah, S/o. Fakeer, Aged 48 years, Occ Agrl. , R/o. H. No. 3-75' Angadi Bazar, Old Bus Stand, Mothkur Mandal, Yadadribhuvanagiri Distric!. 8. Moihkur Jagin, Sio. Brahmachary, Aged 31 years, Occ. Business, R/rc. - -Bus H. No. 6-67, Angadi Bazar, Old Stand, Mothkur Mandal, YadadribhuvanagiriDistrict. KoyyalakariVenkanna,W/o. Samandal -. 9. Kowalakari Navien, S/o. Saniandar, Agd 41 years, Occ. Business, Rl/o. H. No. 2-195/2, Old Bus Stand, Mothkur Mandal, Yadadribhuvanagiri District. l0. Gandham Srinivas Rao, S/o. Sadanandam, Aged 41 years, Occ. Employee, Ri/o. H. No. 2-186, Old Bus Stand, Mothkui Mandal, Yadadribhuvanagiri District ... PETrroNERs AND 1. The State of Telangana , Rep. by its Secretary, MA and UD Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2.

The Mothkur Municipality, Rep. by its Commissioner, Mothkur Mandal, Yadadribhongir District. 3. The Commisiioner, Mothkur Mandal, Yadadadribhongir District. 4. The Station House Officer, Mothkur PS, Mothkur, Yadadribhongir District. 5. M/s. Reliance Jio lnfocomm Limited, Rep. by its Authorized officer. Registered office at 101 , Saffron, Nr. Centre Point, Panbhwati 5 Rasta, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad-380 006. 6. M/s. Reliance Jio lnfocomm Limited, Rep. by its Authorized officer Local Officer at 401 Lake Shore Towers, Rajbhavan Road, Somajiguda, Hyderabad- 500 082. 7 Murarishetti Sreedhar, S/o. Venkataiah, Aged 33 years, Occ. Business, Rl/o. 2-182, Angadi Bazar, Old Bus Stand, Mothkur Mandal, Yadadribhuvanagiri District. ... RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 ot 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 appropriate writ declaring the action of the respondent No.

2 and 3 in issuing the permission infavour of the respondent No. 6 and 7 for installation of Telecommunication lnfrastructures Roof Top (HP ODSC) at premises bearing H. No. 2-182, Angadibazar road, Mothkur vide proceedings No,G1/1 52i202O, d1. 14109/2020 issued by the respondent No. 2 and also declare the action of the respondent No. 4 in threatening us and supporting the respondent No. 6 and 7 for installation of Roof Top Cell tower is illegal, arbitrary, against the principles of natural justice, and unconstitutional lA NO: 1 OF 2020 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 stay the installation of Telecommunication lnfrastructures Roof Top (Hp ODSC) at premises bearing H. No. 2-182, Angadibazar road, Mothkur vide proceedings No. G1115212020, dt. 1410912020 issued by the respondent No. 2 by restraining the Respondent No.

4 from interfering with right and liberty of the petitioners pending disposal of writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. K. RAMA KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondent No. 1: GP FOR MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT Counsel for the Respondent No. 2: SRI PUTTA KRISHNA REDDy, SC Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 5&6: SRI N. MANIKANTA REp SRI P. HEMACHANDRA Counsel for the Respondent No. 7:- The Court made the following: ORDER ,/ HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION No. 17463 of 2O2O ORDER: Heard Sri Putta Krishna Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No. 2 and Sri N. Manikanta, learned counsel representing Sri P. Hemachandra, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. S and 6. None appears for petitioners ald respondent No. 7. 2. This writ petition is filed declaring the action of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 in issuing the permission in favour of respondent Nos.

6 and 7 for installation of Telecommunication Infrastructures Roof Top (HP ODSC) at premises bearing H. No. 2-182, Angadibazar road, Mothkur vide proceedings No. G1/ 15212O2O, dated 14. O9. 2O2O issued by respondent No. 2 and also declare I the action of respondent No. 4 in threatening the I petitioners and supporting respondent Nos. 6 and 7 for I I installation of Roof Top Cel1 Tower as illegal. I KL,J W. P. No. 17 463 of 2O2O 3. Whereas, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 5 and 6, on instructions, would submit that there is no proposal lor respondent Nos. s and 6 to erect the said tower. 4. Vide order dated 19. 1O. 2O2O this Court gralted interim stay. However, in view of the submission of learned coi-rnsel appearing for respondent Nos. S and 6, the cause in the present writ petition no longer survives and this Writ Petition has become infructuous. 5. Recording the said submission, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous.

There shall be no order as to costs As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if aly, pending in the Writ Petition shall stald closed. SD/. P. CH. NAGABHUSHAMBA ASSISTA REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// S TION OFFICER To, 1. Two CCs to GP FOR TUqNtCIpAL ADMTNISTRATTON AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT ,Hiqh court for the state of rerangana, at Hyderabad IOUTI CC to SRt. p riErrlncnnNDRA, _2. Qne Aarilr. 'Io"p0di 3. One CC to SRt. K. RAMA-KR|S+INn, ndvocate t'OpUCt' \ CC to SRt. purTA 4 9ne KRTSHNA REDDY, S'a'iop-utt 5. Two CD Copies BM -0 BSK r0. -)- I HIGH COURT DATED:2611212024 ,FF* t HE STA 14: ( (. ORDER ( 04 Fi! 7i'i5 WP. No. 17463 ot 2020 * I 6_tl PA T DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTOUS WITHOUT COSTS W

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.