Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 23171 (AP)

Bonthu Raju v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/20940/2024 · 2026-01-04

Ravi Cheemalapati

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010407902024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] MONDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 20940/2024 Between: 1. BONTHU RAJU, S/O. APPARAO AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC EX-SERVICE MAN, R/O. HOUSE NO. 3-319/4, NEAR SACHIVALAYAM- II MADANAPATNAM, SAMALKOTA MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT, A.P.- 533005 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYATI RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KAKINADA DISTRICT, A.P. 3. THE DISTRICT PANCHAYATI RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, KAKINADA DISTRICT, A.P. 4. MANDAL REVENUE OFFICER, SAMALKOTA MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT, A.P. 5. THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY, MADHAVAPATNAM, SAMALKOTA MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT, A.P. 6. M/S INDUS TOWERS LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS CIRCLE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, O/O. DOOR NO 4051, 8TH FLOOR, SLN TERMINUS, MAIN ROAD, (BESIDE BOTANICAL GARDENS, SURVEY NO 133) GACHIBOWLI, T.S., HYDERABAD 2 - 500032 ...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 to issue a Writ, One in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Direction or Order declaring the action of the respondent no.s 1 to 5 in not considering our representation Dt. 09,September, 2024 about request to shift/stop the proposed installation of Mobile Towers in the residential areas around New Sachivalayam-ll constructing by the 6th respondent in the Madhavapatnam village Grama survey no.3 in the premises of Gramasachivalayam-l l, RBK building back side with 40 x 40 feets an extent of 177.77 Sq. yards land, which is illegal, arbitrary, and unjust contrary to law and in violation of Article 14, 19, 21 of Constitution of India and principles of Natural Justice IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 grant Stay on the construction and installation of Mobile Towers in the residential areas around new Sachivalayam-ll constructing by the 6th respondent in the Madhavapatnam village Grama survey no.3, pending this Writ petition, Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. PEDDI VIJAYBHASKAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2. GP FOR REVENUE 3. Yarraguntla.Koteswara Rao,Standing Counsel For Zilla Praja Parishads,Mandal Praja Parishads and Gra 4. JAMPANA SRIKANTH 3 The Court made the following: ORDER: Aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents in not considering the representation dated 09.09.2024 requesting to shift/stop the proposed installation of Mobile Towers in the residential areas around new Sachivalayam-II constructed by the 6th respondent in Madhavapatnam Village Gram Survey No.3 in the premises of Grama Sachivalayam-II, RBK building back side with 40X40 feet in an extent of 177.77 Sq. yards land, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Sri Peddi Vijay Bhaskar, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted after filing writ petition, the proposal of installation of mobile towers has been stalled, as such, no further orders are required to be passed in the writ petition. He further submitted that if at all the respondents have any intention to install mobile towers in the said village, they have to follow law, accordingly, prayed to pass appropriate orders. 3. Taking the submissions of the learned counsel into consideration, as the respondent have stalled the proposal, there is no purpose in keeping the writ petition pending and the same is liable to be closed. 4. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed. It is needless to observe that if at all the respondents want to install any mobile towers in the 4 subject village in future, they have to follow law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 05th January, 2026 RKS