Allowed

Indus Towers Limited v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC22 Oct 2024WP/29163/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought writ mandamus directing police authorities to implement a 2019 memorandum ensuring police protection for cell tower erection. Hegrafted a specific clause of an affidavit seeking protection at 29 locations.

What did the court decide?

Directions given to respondents to implement R.C. No. 309/L&O-111/2019 memo and provide police aid for erection of cell towers at 29 specified locations.

Indus Towers Limited Vs The State of Telangana — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³¹⁸³ ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.VIJAYSEN REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 29163 OF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

lndus Towers Limited, Survey No.^'133, 4-51, Bth Floor, SLN Terminus, Beside Botanical Gardens, Gachibowli, Hyderabad - 500032 Rep. by its Circle Legal Head Mr. Girish Chandra [t/anchikatla.

¶9

.....PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad - 500022.

¶12

The Director General of Police, Telangana State, Telangana State Police Headquarter, Lakdikapul Rd, opposite Ravindra Bharathi, Ambedkar Colony, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500004.

¶13

.....RESPONDENTS

¶14

Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed theiewith, the High Court may be pleased to pass an order or orders or Writ or more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents Nos.'1 and 2 to implement the Memorandum bearing R.C. No. 309/L and 0-11112019 daled 13/0812019 by directing all the Superintendents of Police and Commissioners of Police in the State of Telangana to direct the concerned Station House Officers to provide necessary police protection without any further^judicial intervention in the future as and when sought by the Petitioner during the erection and/or operation of cell towers and also currently on 29 locations where ongoing challenges in local territories persist as detailed in Annexure -3.

¶15

¶16

.A-N 1 0F 2024

¶17

Petition Under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to direct the Respondents No.i and 2 to consider the petitioners representations even dated 2910512024 and provide necessary porice protection to the petitioner at the 29 rocations where ongoing chaflenges in rocar territories persist as detaired in Annexure-3 pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶18

Counsel for the petitioner : SRt ZUBIN J.F. POOVATHINKAL

¶19

counsel for the Respondents : sRr G.ANTKETH REDDY, AGp FoR HOME The Court made the following ORDER

¶20

---7/

¶21

¶22

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTTCE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY

¶23

WRIT PETITION No.29163 oF 2024

¶24

ORDER: (ORAL)

¶25

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking fottowing

¶26

reliel:

¶27

"... to pass an order or orden or Writ or more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents Nos. I and 2 to implement the Memorandum bearing R.C.No.309/L&O-lll/2019 dated 13.08.2019 by directing all the Superintendents of Police and Commissioners of Police in the State of Telangana to direct the concemed Station House Officers to provide necessary police protection r.vithout any further judicial intervention in the future as and when sought by the Petitioner during the erection andlor operation of cell towers and also currently on 29 locations where ongoing challenges in local territories persist as detailed in Annexure - 3 and to pass ..."

¶28

Heard Mr. Zubin J.F. Poovathinkal, leamed counsel for the petitioner and Mr. G. Aniketh Reddy, learned Assistant Covemment Pleader for Home.

¶29

Leamed counsel for the petitioner submitted that representation d,ated 29.05.2024 hx been submitted by the

¶30

¶31

petitioner to respondent No., to provide police protection to the petitioner to erect cell towers at twenty nine (29) locations. It is submitted that petitioner has been facing challenges from the local people whenever cell towers are erected. There had been consistent orders by this Court and several other High Courts in favour of petitioner and other similarly placed companies whenever requests are made seeking police protection for erecting cell towers.

¶32

Leamed counsel fbr the petitioner has drawn the aftention of this Court to the memo dated 13.08.2019 in Rc.No.309iL&O_ IlU20l9 issued by respondent No.2 - Director General of police, Telangana State, instructing all the police Commissioners and Superintendents of Police in the State to provide necessary protection wherever sought and ensure hassle free erection of communication towers bv the petitioner. It is submitted that in view of the said memo it forms obligation on the part of respondent authorities in extending police protection as and when cell towers are erected. Despite representation dated 29.05.2024, there is no action forthcoming fiom the respondents. As petitioner

¶33

¶34

already made^{arrangementsfor erection of cell towers at twen[y} ninedifferentlocations(AnnexureA3),itwouldbedifficultto make individual^{applications' moreover memo dated 13'08'2019is} already in place^{and operative as on today'}

¶35

In the circumstances^{respondentauthorities are directed to} forthwith implement^{thememo dated 13'08'2019 in} Rc.No.309/L&O-IIV20I9^{issued by respondentNo'2 by giving} directions to^{the Station House Officersconcemedto extendPolice} aid whenever^{request is made for erection of communication} towers. Further,^{respondents are directedto extend Police aid for}

¶36

erection of cell^{towersat twenty nine (29) locations (Annexure,A,3)} as and when^{requests are made by the petitioner'}

¶37

With the above^{observationsthe writ petition is disposedof'} There shall^{be no order as to costs'}

¶38

As a sequel^{thereto' miscellaneousapplications' ifany'}

¶39

pending in the^{writ petition standclosed'} iI

¶40

DDY sD,-P^PADMA$IREt R SECTION^OFFICER

¶41

//TRUE^COPY//

¶42

Home^{Department'Secretariat'State or relansana} t" , :iilJ:H,#lsetglqry,

¶43

,H"3J"",*i,.'",mniilrur""rlx#a:1',:n5#',T3111?'3:?i:3:i""' ror rhe^{stateor reransana at}

¶44

"^{+#"",*?t 1,";TAilaaif:o3tn "oun}

¶45

; 3lt'itd!?YlL"'*^{J F PoovArHrNKAL'AdvocateroPucl} 5. Two^{CD CoPies} h

HIGH COURT

DATED:2 211012024

ORDER

WP.No.29163 of 2024

o i{ 1HE sI4 rC:
t
,J:,
v
..)
13 t'l0\l 2ul
0t
.SPAT C rt
!r,.*

¶51

DISPOSING OF THE W.P

¶52

WITHOUT COSTS.

¶53

a @*r" .-.---r!rr\r9-$"

Indus Towers Limited v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indus Towers Limited v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kommana Tejaswi Vs Union of India

Ms. Shalini Sood Awasthi Vs The State of Telangana

M/s Sri Saidurga Constructions Vs Mr. Uppalapati Srihari Rao

Mohammad Flamed Hussain Vs The State of Telangana

Devasoth Hanuma, Vs The State of Telangana

Guguloth Bujji Vs The State of Telangana