APHC010439042014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] THURSDAY ,THE NINTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 17768/2014 Between: S.bhanumathi & Another and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of Ap Municipal Admn Dept 4 Others and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. SYED KHADER MASTAN Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. 2. GP-MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV(AP) 3. A S C BOSE (SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS AP) 4. J N BHUSHAN The Court made the following: ORDER: The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “….to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in granting permission vide proceedings Rc.No.845/14/G1 dated 8.4.2014 to the 4th respondent to erect roof top tower in violation of clause 7 © of G.O.Ms.No380 dated 1-8-2013 as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently set aside the proceedings Rc.No.845/14/G1 dated 8-4- 2014 issued by the 3rd respondent and be pleased to pass..” 2. Heard Sri Syed Khader Mastan, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development appearing for the respondent No.1, Sri A.S.C.Bose, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.2 & 3, Sri Bhushan, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.4 & 5 and perused the material available on record. 4. During hearing, learned Government Pleader for Municipal Administration and Urban Development appearing for the respondents and as well as learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the issue involved in this Writ Petition is squarely covered by earlier orders of the Erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh in W.P. No.12464 of 2015, dated 15.09.2015, wherein this Court passed a detailed Order by allowing the writ petition. Operative portion of the said order reads as under: “7. In view of the orders issued in G.o.Ms.No.146, Municipal Administration & Urband Development (M2) Department, dated 19.06.2015, wherein the earlier conditions now stand removed, it cannot be said that the installation of TIT by the 6th respondent in erroneous. As rightly contended by the learned Standing Counsel for the 6th respondent, even assuming that in terms of G.O. Ms.No.380, Municipal Administration & Urban Development Department, dated 01.08.2013, the installation of TIT by the 6th respondent was in violation of the condition in Clause E(vii)(c), since such clause is no more available, no direction can be issued asking the 6th respondent to remove the structure already installed or not to undertake installation. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petitionnis is dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioners, if so advised to challenge the G.O.Ms. No. 146, Municipal Administration & Urban Development (M2) Department, dated 19.06.2015. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed." 4. In view of the same, as the issue involved in the present writ petition is similar to W.P.No.12464 of 2015, this Court feels it appropriate to allow the present writ petition in similar lines. 5. In the result, the Writ petition is dismissed and the petitioners are at liberty, if so advised to challenge the G.O.Ms.No.146, Municipal Administration & Urban Development (M2) Department, dated 19.06.2015. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 09.01.2025 SRT 260 THE HONOURABLE SMT.JUSTICE V.SUJATHA W.P.No.17768 of 2014 Date: 09.01.2025 SRT