Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 14876 (AP)

VARAPRASAD v. PRL.SECY., MA., & UD DEPT., HYD., & 4 OTHERS,

WP/24063/2016 · 2025-09-14

Harinath N

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010186702016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] MONDAY,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 24063/2016 Between: Varaprasad ...PETITIONER AND Prl Secy Ma Ud Dept Hyd 4 Others and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SAI GANGADHAR CHAMARTY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. P HEMACHANDRA 2. T S VENKATARAMANA 3. GP-MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV(AP) 4. V RAGHU 5. SREENIVASA RAO VELIVELA The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION No.24063 OF 2016 ORDER: 1. This writ petition has been filed challenging the inaction of respondents 1 to 3 for stopping the construction and installation of a Telecommunication Infrastructure Tower in R.S. No.35/2, Ramalingeswara Nagar, Bhavani Road, beside Sai Public School, Vijayawada, in spite of the objections raised on 23.05.2016 and in violation of G.O.Ms. No.146, dated 19.06.2015. 2. This Court, by an order dated 21.07.2016, granted interim direction with respect to the erection of Tele Communication Infrastructure Tower in the subject property. 3. Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the 4th respondent submits that the 4th respondent has not erected any Telecommunication Infrastructure Tower and they have not proposed any installation of such a tower as challenged in this petition. 4. In view of this submission, nothing survives to be adjudicated on merits in the present writ petition. 5. Hence, the writ petition is closed. No costs. 6. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Dt.15.09.2025 BV