APHC010139522017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] THURSDAY, THE 24th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 13637/2017 Between: 1. M/S NANDYAL DIGITAL T.V. COMMUNICATIONS, R/O. D.NO.414/H/2, R.P.COMPLEX, N.K.ROAD, NANDYAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. REP. BY ITS MANAGER N.JAYACHANDRA REDDY ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE A P SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LTD, VIDYUTH NILAYAM, TIRUPATHI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. REP. BY ITS CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER (OPERATIONS), 2. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, OPERATION CIRCLE, A.P.S.P.D.C.L., KURNOOL. 3. THE DIVISIONAL ENGINEER, OPERATIONS, A.P.S.P.D.C.L., NANDYAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 4. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, OPERATIONS, A.P.S.P.D.C.L., NANDYAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 5. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NANDYAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 6. M/S SILPA DIGITAL NETWORK LTD, NANDYAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased toto issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature 2 of writ of Mandamus to declare the delay and inaction on. the part of the respondent No.1 in disposing of the representation submitted by the respondent No.6 in accordance with the section 4 (b) of the Cable TV Act and as per the directions of this Hon'ble Court and consequently preventing the respondent No.6 in using the new electrical poles in the various villages for purpose of laying the Cable Strung without obtaining permission as arbitrary, illegal and consequently direct the 1st respondent to pass the orders as per section 4 (b) of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 on the representation submitted by the respondent No.6 and not to allow the respondent No.6 to lay the cable strung by using the new electrical poles without prior permission in the interest of justice. IA NO: 1 OF 2017(WPMP 16931 OF 2017 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 direct the 1st respondent to pass the orders as per section 4 (B) of the Cable Televsion Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 on the representation submitted by the respondent No.6 and not to allow the respondent No6 to lay the calbe stung by using the new electrial poles without prior permission pending dispsal of the WP., in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P NAGENDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME (AP) 2. V R REDDY KOVVURI(SC FOR APSPDCL) 3. Venkata Rama Rao Kota SC FOR APSPDCL 4. 5. K RATHANGA PANI REDDY 3 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO.13637 OF 2017 ORDER: 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner on record submits that the cause in the present writ petition no longer survives for adjudication by this Court. 2. In view of the submission by the learned counsel for the petitioner, writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. 3. Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending if any, shall stand dismissed. ______________________________________ JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA Date: 24-09-2026 BSM 4 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO.13637 OF 2017 Date 24-09-2026 W BSM