Rondla Sunil Reddy Vs The Panchayat Secretary — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

Rondla Sunil Reddy Vs The Panchayat Secretary — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief granted; the writ petition was closed as infructuous with no order as to costs, and pending miscellaneous applications were ordered closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the permission granted by Respondent No.1 on 02-10-2019 to install a mobile signal tower at a centrally located residential area in Khapraipally village was arbitrary, illegal and contrary to G.O.Ms.334 (Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (Pts.IV) Department) dated 09-10-2012, warranting its cancellation. (Note: this issue as posed in the petition was never adjudicated; the petition was closed as infructuous.)

Ratio / Principle

The Writ Petition was closed as infructuous, following the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners (Sri Ch. Laxman, representing Sri Adhi Venkateshwara Rao) that the case did not survive for adjudication; no order as to costs was made.

Key takeaways

Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in the writ petition were ordered to stand closed.ratio¶62-63

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad (Special Original Jurisdiction); single-member bench of Smt Justice T. Madhavi Devi; decided 01-07-2025. Writ Petition No.24415 of 2019, filed by Rondla Sunil Reddy and 94 other residents of Khapraipally village, Atmakur Mandal, Yadadri Bhongir District (Old Nalgonda District), against the Panchayat Secretary, Khapraipally Gram Panchayat, the District Collector and Magistrate, the District Panchayat Officer, the State of Telangana, Reliance Jio Infratel Pvt. Ltd., and Donala Veera Reddy (impleaded per C.O. dt. 10-06-2021 in IA No.2/2019), was CLOSED AS INFRUCTUOUS on the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners that the case did not survive for adjudication; no order as to costs; pending miscellaneous applications stood closed. The petition had sought a writ of Mandamus under Article 226 declaring arbitrary, illegal and contrary to G.O.Ms.334 of Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (Pts.IV) Department, dated 09-10-2012 (Govt. of A.P.), the permission granted by Respondent No.1 on 02-10-2019 to install a mobile signal tower emitting high radiation in a centrally located residential area, and had sought cancellation of that permission. No legal issue was adjudicated and no precedent was cited or relied upon.

[³²¹⁹ ]

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

TUESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE T.MADHAVI DEVI

WRIT PETITION NO:24415 OF 2019

Between:

Rondla Sunil Reddy, S/o.R.Narsi Reddy, age 30^years,

D.Damoder Reddy, S/o. Ramreddy, age 55^years

A.Ramesh, S/o. Sattaiah, age 40^years,

L.Balreddy, S/o. Gopal Reddy, age 70^years,

B. Yadaiah, S/o. Buchaiah, age 58^years,

B.Padma, Wo. Srisailam, age 32 years,

P.Shoba Rani, Wo. Jalender Reddy, age 38^years,

A-Lokesh, S/o. Ramesh, age 18^years,

A.Shobha, Wo.Ramesh, age 30 years,

R.Yadireddy, S/o.Ramireedy, age 65^years,

B.Uppalamma, Wo.Swamy, age 45^years,

'12. B.Swamy, S/o. Muttaiah, age 50 years,

'13. B.Saibabu, S/o. Swamy, age 25 years,

R.Laximi, W/o. Yadireddy, age 49 years,

R.Mohan Reddy, S/o. Ramireddy, age 50 years,

'16. D.Nirmalamma, Wo. Damoder Reddy, age 50 years,

D. Satthireddy, S/o. Laxmareddy, age 68 years, lS.D.tvlahender Reddy, S/o. Shenker Reddy, age 30^years,

D. Shanker Reddy, S/o. Peddiramireddy, age 58^years,

20- R-Laximi, Wo. Sudaker, age 45^years,

21 . R. Sudhaker, S/o. Narsaiah, age 50 years,

R.Prakash, S/o. Narsaiah, age 45 years,

R.Shobha Rani, Wo. Prakash, age 38 years,

M. Kavitha, Wo. Narsimha, age 40 years,

D.Andamma, Wio. Sreenivas Reddy, age 50^years,

P. Srinivas Reddy, S/o. Yadireddy, age 60^years,

27.P.Padma, Wo. Srihari, age 30 years

P.Srihari, S/o. Pullaiah, age 55^years, 29. P. Uma, D/o. Srihari, age 19 years, 30. P. Rushikumar, S/o. Srihari, 31 . G.Pawan Kumar, S/o. Biksham, age 22 years, 32. G. Manoj, S/o. Pedda Ramulu, age 25^years, 33. G.Madhu, S/o. Sattaiah, age 30^years, 34. P.Seetahramulu, S/o. Yadaiah, age 42^years, 35. B.Narsaiah, S/o. Rajamalliah, age 65^years, 36. N.Bikshapati, S/o. Shivaramaiah, age 60^years, 37. Y.Bikshamreddy, S/o. Venkatanarsimhareeddy, age 55^years, 38. P.Yellaiah, S/o. Amiddam, age 45^years, 39. Y.Anlireddy, S/o. Venkatanarsimhareddy, age^{65 years,} 40. D.Yadireddy, S/o. Narsireddy, age 55^years, 41. B.Sridhar, S/o. Beeraiah, age 28^years, 42. K.Chandrashker, S/o. Uppalaiah, age 29^years, 43. K.Siddaiah, S/o. Narsaiah, age 50^years, 44. P.Venkatreddy, s/o. Lingareddy, age 55^year 45. J.Satthaiah, S/o. Siddaiah, )ge 65^years, 46. K.Mahesh, S/o. Uppalaiah, age 27 yearc, 47. K.Jayamma, W/o. Yadaiah, age 55^years, 48. K.Ramachendru, S/o. Yadagiri, age 45^years, 49. K.Umesh, S/o. Mallaiah, age 21^years, 50. K.Mallesh, S/o. Yadagiri, age 40^years, 51.K.Mangamma, S/o. Ramachandru, age 35^years, 52. B.Somaiah, S/o. Buchaiah, age 55^years, 53. B.Laximi, W/o. Muttaiah, age 45^years, 54. B.Andamma, W/o. Narsaiah, age 50^years, 55.A-Prameela, W/o. Swamy , age 35^years, 56. G.Manemma, W/o. Sathaiah, age 40^years, 57. G.Mallamma, W/o. Sathaiah, age 45^years 58. B.Mangamma, W/o. Ravi, age 30^years, 59. P.Alivelu, W/o. Yadagiri, age 30^years, 60. P.Yadagiri, S/o.Narsaiah, age 35^years, 61. N-Srinu, S/o. Narsimha, age 55^years, 62. N. Krishna, S/o. Narsimha, age 35^years, 63. B. Anjaneyuly, S/o. Narsimha, age 50^years, 64. Ch. Vamshi, S/o. Narsimha, age 22^years, 65. B.Krishna, S/o. Ramulu, age 28^years,

D.Renuka, W/o. Krishna, age 28^years,

G.Sumalatha, Wo. Biksham, age 24 years, 68. P.Ramulamma, Wo. Battaiah, age 45 years, 69. P-Chandravathi, W/o. Yadaiah, age 35 years, 70. A.Swamy, S/o. Yadaiah, age 50 years, 71. K.Naresh, S/o. Beeraiah, age 28 years, 72. V.Srinu, S/o. Narsaiah, age 45 years, 73. R.Dhanamma, Wo. Narsireddy ,age 28 years, 74. B.Rajamma, Wo. Ayilaiah, age 50 years, 75.K.Radha, W/o. Ganesh, age 40 years, 76. R.Narsimhareddy, S/o.Ramireddy, age 60 years, 77. R.Anil Reddy, Sio. Narsireddy, age 35 years, 78. R.Saritha, Wo.Anil Reddy, age 33 years, 79. R.Jyothi, w/o. Sunil Reddy, age 29 years, 80. K. Ivlangamma, Wo. Ramulu, age 35 years, 81. B-Buchamma, Wo. Ayodhyaramulu, age 65 years, 82. D.Surender Reddy, S/o. LaxmaReddy, age 50 years, 83. D.Prameela, Wo. Surender.Reddy, age 45 years, 84.R.Venkat Reddy, S/o. Mohan Reddy, age 27 yearc, 85. R.Ravinder Reddy, S/o. Mohan Reddy, age 29 years, 86. R.Venkat Reddy, S/o. Yadireddy, age 35 years, 87. R.Upender Reddy, S/o. Yadireddy, age 39 years, 88. R.Malathi, Wo. Venkat Reddy, age 30 years, 89. R.Anitha, Wo. Upender Reddy, age 30 years, 90. D.Venkat Reddy, S/o. Srinivas Reddy, age 39 years, 9'1. K.Basavaiah, S/o.Narsimha, age 52 years, 92. D.lvlahender Reddy, S/o. yadireddy, age 38 years, 93. D.Rajitha, Wo. Mahender Reddy, age 29 years, 94. Y. Narsimha Reddy, S/o. Narayanareddy, age 45 years, 95, K. Lalitha, Wo. Mohan Reddy, age 48 years, All are residents of Khapraipally village and gram Panchayat, Atmakur Mandal, Yadadri Bhongir diskict, (OId Naigonda District).

...PETITIONERS

AND

1 The Panchayat Secretary, Khapraipally Gram Panchayat, Atmakur Mandal, Yadadri Bhongir District, (Old Nalgonda district)

2 The District Collector and Magistrate, Yadadri Bhongir District (Old Nalgonda Diskict)

District Panchayat Officer, Yadadri District (Old Nalgonda District)

4 The State of_Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary Panchayat Raj, Secretariat, BRR Bhavan, Hyd.

5 The Reliance Jio infratel Pvt. Ltd, rep. by its ln charge Local office 204, Lake Shore Towers, Raj Bhavan Rd Somajiguda, Hyderab;d-soo 082.

r, Mr. Donala Veera Reddy S/o. Pitchi Reddy, Fyo. Khaoraioallv Villaoe. Atmakur Mandal District, Yadadri- Bhuvanagiri (OtU ruatgonOd Districi.)

R6 is impleaded as per C.O. dt. 10l06l2121in lA No. 2/2019

...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st Respondent granting permission Dt 2-1o-2o19 permission to install Mobile signal rower at centrally located residential area which emits high radiation and causes damage the health of the villagers as arbitrary, illegal, unjust and contrary to the G.O.Ms.334 of Panchayat Raj and Rural development (pts.lV) Department, dated 09-10-2012, Govt. of A.P and consequen y direct the 1st Respondent to cancel the permission granled to install the Mobile signal rower dated 02-10-20'r 9 in terms of the said G.O.

lA NO: 1 OF 2019

Petition under Section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fiied in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the permission granted by the 1st respondent dated O2-10_2019 to sth Respondent to erect and install the Mobile Signal Tower near High Density Residential Area at Khapraipally Vi age, Atmakur Mandal, yadadri Bhongir District, during the pendency of the above referred Writ petition.

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRt ADHI VENKATESWARA RAO

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : SRI G.NARENDER REDDY(SC FOR GppS)

Counsel for the Respondent No.2 to 4 : Gp FOR PANCHAYATH RAJ

Counsel for the Respondent No.5 : SRI p.HEMA CHADNRA

Counset for the Respondent No.6 : SRI ADHI VENKATESWARA RAO

The Court made the fotlowing: ORDER

THE HON'BLE SMT.^{JUSTICET. MADHAVI DEVI}

WRIT PETIT^{ION No.24415of 2Ol9}

ORDER:

Sri Ch. La,xman, learned^{counsel representing Sri} Adhi Venkateshwara^{Rao, learned counsel forthe} petitioners, submitted that the^{camsein this Writ Petition} does not survive for^{adjudication and that it hasbecome} infructuous.

Accordingly, the^{WritPetition isclosed as}

infructuous. No order^{as to costs.}

Miscellaneous applications, if^{any, pending in this}

writ petition, shall stand^closed

SD/. K. AMMAJI DEPUW REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// .

SECTION OFFICER

To,

1 One CC to SRI ADHI VENKATESWARA RAO,

te. [oPUC]

2 One CC to SRI G.NARENDER REDDY, (SC FOR GPPS). [OPUC]

J Two CCs to GP FOR PANCHAYATH RAJ, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

4 One CC to SRI P.HEMA CHANDRA, Advocate. [OPUC]

5 Two CD Copies.

BSK

BIM

HIGH COURT

DATED:01 10712025

ORDER

,/,= ':: "
/..-''*1.,',.-, j l t
1, -,' s
l-
I r.)
1{ tlJB ztui
7a
t
t'
. ..,.,^

WP.No.24415 ot 2019

CLOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

/2. g
4rzyrz<;