APHC010014752014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] THURSDAY ,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 40367/2014 Between: M/s, Indus Towers Limited, ...PETITIONER AND Anantapur Municipal Corporation ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. GHANTA SRIDHAR Counsel for the Respondent: 1. A S C BOSE (SC FOR MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition came to be 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 issuing Notice bearing R.C. No. 3405/2008/G2, dated : 18- 12-2013 and threatening to demolish the towers erected within the limits of the Respondent Municipal Corporation for non-compliance of G.O.Ms. No. 380, dated : 01- 08-2013, as, arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction and contrary to the provisions of The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955....” 2. The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner aggrieved by the action of the respondents in issuing notice dated 18.12.2013 threatening to demolish the towers erected by the petitioner within the limits of the respondent corporation, due to non-compliance of G.O.Ms.No.380, dated 01.08.2013. 3. When the writ petition came up for admission on 30.12.2014, this Court has passed the following order: “Having regard to the fact that the petitioner had already paid a sum of Rs.25,000/- in 2012 for each tower, there shall be interim direction as prayed for.” 4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel. 5. Today, when the writ petition came up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel has produced a copy of instructions of the Assistant City Planner (I/C), Ananthapuramu Municipal Corporation, dated 23.01.2025 wherein it is stated that after verification of available records, it was noticed that previously, notices were issued for demolishing the towers that were erected without complying with the norms prescribed in G.O.Ms.No.380, dated 01.08.2013. Thereafter, no action has been initiated nor steps were initiated for removal of the petitioner’s towers. It is further stated that there are no such issues till date and if at all any such issues arise, the respondents would follow due process of law. 6. It can be seen from the material available on record that in pursuance of the impugned notice dated 18.12.2013, no steps have been initiated for demolishing the towers erected by the petitioner herein and that as on today, the respondents do not have any issue with regard to the erection of the said towers and if at all they intend to demolish the said towers, they would follow due process of law. As such, this Court feels it appropriate to set- aside the impugned notice dated 18.12.2013. 7. In view of the same, the impugned notice bearing R.C.No.3405/2008/G2, dated 18.12.2013 is hereby set-aside. However, the respondents are directed not to interfere with the petitioner’s towers, without following due process of law. 8. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date:23.01.2025 Gss