APHC010363562016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] THURSDAY ,THE SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 9508/2016 Between: Sr.manager-legal, M/s.indus Towers Ltd, Hyderabad ...PETITIONER AND Commissioner Bhimavaram Municipality West Godavari Dist ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. GHANTA SRIDHAR Counsel for the Respondent: 1. Sireesha Rani Vallabhaneni,Standing Counsel For Municipalities The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “...to issue an appropriate Writ or order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in interfering with the erection of tower in RS.No.473, near Door No.19-10-34, situated at Indira Priya Darshini Colony, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District, by the petitioner company by virtue of deemed permission, without issuing any notice whatsoever to the petitioner company, as arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction, contrary to the provisions of the Andhra pradesh Municipalities Act, 1965 and rules made thereunder and in utter violation of well settled principles of natural justice...” 2. The present petition is filed challenging the action of the respondents in interfering with the erection of tower in RS.NO.473, near Door No.19-10-34, situated at Indira Priya Darshini Colony, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District by the petitioner company by virtue of deemed permission, without issuing any notice to the petitioner. 3. When the writ petition came up for admission on 19.08.2016, this Court has passed the following interim order: “Having regard to clause (D)(1) of the G.O.Ms.No.146 Municipal Administration & Urban Development (M2) Department, dt.19.06.2015, which provides for deemed permission, if not permission or refusal is granted within 30 days from the date of receipt of application, there shall be interim direction as prayed for.” 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Sireesha Rani Vallabhaneni, learned Standing Counsel for the sole respondent. 5. Today, when the writ petition came up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel has brought to the notice of this Court that pending the present petition, the petitioner company has erected a tower in RS.No.473, near Door No.19-10-34 situated at Indira Priya Darshini Colony, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District. 6. Recording the submission made by learned Standing Counsel and even in view of the interim order granted by this Court on 19.08.2016, this Court feels that no further cause survives in the writ petition and that the matter has become infructuous. 7. Accordingly, with the above direction, this writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE V. SUJATHA Date: 02.01.2025 GSS