Writ petition challenging erection of an Aircel telephone tower near petitioners' houses was dismissed for non-prosecution as no one appeared for the petitioners on two listings.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
I33831
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY
WRIT PETITION NO: 2370 OF 2016
Between:
AND
'Hyderabad. T.S.
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lrr ,a praying that in the circumstances stated rn the affidavit filed therewith, th: High Court may be pleased to issue an order or direction more in the nature ri Writ of Mandamus. declaring the inaction of the respondents 2 to 6, in cons cering th,: objections made by the petitioners, dated 07-'1 1-2015 in permitting t rr: 7th Respondent to erect the Aircl telephone tower adjacent to the house bea ing No. 23-4-561 and 23-4-559, Mehterwadi, Sultan Shahi, Hyderabad-65, belor ying to thr: petrtioners and further declaring the action of the Respondents 1 to, in permiiting the 7th respondent for erecting the Aircel telephone tower con: lry to tho guidelines issued in G.O.lVS.N0.380, dated 01-08-2013 and also violative cf the A.P. Buildings Rules, 20'12, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of ri; ris guaranteed u nder
Articlesl4, 19, 21 , 300-A of the Constitution of lndia and consequently direct the 7th Respondent not to erect the Aircel telephone tower at lvlehterwadi, Sultan Shahi, Hyderabad.
l.A. NO: 1 OF 2016(WPMP. NO: 2987 OF 2016)
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 stay the erection / construction of Aircel telephone tower adjacent to the Houses bearing Nos. 23-4-561 and 23-4-559, lVlehterwadj, Sultan Shahi, Hyderabad-65, pending the disposal of the above Writ Petition.
l.A. NO: 2 OF 2016(WPMP. NO: 4635 OF 2016)
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may bepleased To amend and substitute the prayer in the above sard Writpetition as under:- That thrs Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue an order or direction more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the respondents 2 to 6, in considering the objections made by the petitioners, dated 07-1 1-2015 in permitting the 7th Respondent to erect the Airel telephone tower adjacent to the house bearing No. 23-4-561 and 23-4559, Mehterwadi, Sultan Shahi. Hyderabad-65, belonging to the petitioners and further declaring the actron of the Respondents1 to 6 in permitting the 7th respondent for erecting the Aircel telephone tower contrary to the guidelines issued in G.O. MS. NO.96, l,4unicipal Administration & Urban Development (lr/1) Department, dated 5-8-2015, and also violative of the A.P. Buildings Rules, 2012, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of rights guaranteed under Articlegl4, 19, 21, 300-A of the Constitution of lndia, and contrary to the Judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court and consequently direct the 7th Respondent not to erect the Aircel telephone tower at Mehterwadi, Sultan Shahi, Hyderabad.
Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI P. VINOD LAL(NONE APPEARED) Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR MCPL ADMN-URBAN DEV Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 and 3: SRI RAPARTHI VENKATESH (SC FOR GHMC TELANGANA)
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.S and 6: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER
i l
THE HON'BLESRI JUSTICE LAXMINARAYI'I,A ALISHETTY WRIT PETITIONNo.2370of 20 ti
ORDER:
When the Writ Petitionwas listed ort'2 ) 08'2025, Lhere \'as no representation onbehalf of the petition:'r; and irs such' thisCourtdirectedthemattertobelistedunderther:aptitln.for dismissal'.
3 Accordingly, theWrit Petition isdisrr issed fotnon prosecution. There shallbe no order as to costs
4 . Miscellaneous applicationspending,ifa r1', shall stand
closed
SD/.B. REKHA RANI I SSISTANT REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
.<=.'_.'.---
-r
I SECTION OFFICER
\
To,
.,
TJ
BS \g\,
I
j i li I
I : i l l
HIGH COURT
DATED:0810912025
ORDER
WP.No.2370 of 2016
T SIe
(
o
2
2 | rr:B 2026
* *
..., :li
DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION FOIi NONPROSECUTION
WITHOUT COSTS
.^<br>tA*
o
SK.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
M. Jitender Singh and 17 others
The State of Telangana
The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation
The Zonal Commissioner, South Zone, GHMC
The Housing Board, Telangana
The Aircel Company, Aircel Business Solution
Laxminarayana Alishetty
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
