Sapthagiri colony Development committee v. 1. The State of Telengana

2. Warrangal Municipal Corporation, rep., by its, Commissioner, Warrangal. 3. The District Collector, Warrangal., - 4. M/s Reliance Jio lnfocomm Ltd., ., by its Manager, H.NO:, 401, Raj Bhavan 5. Sri. Kumaraswamy, s/o Uppalaiah, rlo H.No.31-3-41/1, Sapthagiri'colony Road, Somajiguda, Khairatabad, Hyderabad. ' Phase.ll, Waddepally, Hanumakonda, Warrangal Dist. 6. The Union of lndia, rep., by its Secretary, Ministry of, Communications and lnformation Technology, Department of Telecommunications, Electronics . Niketan, 6, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003. ...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 Writ, Order or Direction one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the G.O.Ms.No. 380 Municipal Administration and Ur:ban Development Department, dt.1-8-2013 and the proceedings in CP/2893212O14 dated- 23-03-2015 of the 2nd Respondent and in not taking steps for removal of the c.ell towers erected on the terrace/roofs of the Respondent No.S, as beingl illegal, arbitrary, violativer'of Art.14, 21 of the Constitution of lndia and \ consequently by setting aside the same, direct the Respondents to remove the cell tower erected on the terrace/roofs of the sth Respondent ' .r:"!:tiii..?,:' : : JffiI,: Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affitlavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the the G.O.Ms.No.380 Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, dt.1-8-2013 and the proceedings in cp/2gg32t2014 dated: 23-03-2015 of the 2nd Respondent and stop further erection of the tower and remot'e the cell tower erected on the terrace/roof of the Respondent No.S, pending disposal of the above writ petition. counsel fcrr the Petitioner: Ms. G. R. MERcy vrJAyA REp SRI.PBVIJAYKUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : GP FOR MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRAT|ON AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT counsel for the Respondent No.2: sRr PASHAM MoHlrH REDDY, :3: 53 F#Ht?Efr b ."o c o u n s e I ro " t h e R e s p o n d e ", N " counsel fo' the Respondent No.4: sRr p. HEMA CHANDRA counsel for the Respondent No.6: Dy. sollgtroR GENERAL oF INDIA Counsel for the Respondent No. S:-_ * t o RArio N The Court nrade the fottowing: ORDER HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALIS .,: No.1 : 1r'i , ,; ]: ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking following relief: "To declare the inaction of respondent No.2 in not taking steps for removal of the cell towers erected on the terroce/roofs of the respondent No.5, as illegal and arbitrary. " a 2 Heard Ms. G.R. Mercy Vijaya, learned counsel representing Sri P.B. Vtjuy Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner on record, Sri Pasham Mohith Reddy, learned Standing counsel for respondent No.2 and Sri P. Hema Chandra, learned counsel for respondent No.4.

3. Learned counsel' for the petitioner would submit that petitioner herein is the association, situated at Sapthagiri Colony, Hanumakonda, Warangal District. Respondent No.4 erected cell tower over the roof top towers and ground based towers over terrace/roof of the house of respondent No.5 bearing H-No.3l-3- 4I I !,Sapthagiri colony, Phase-II, Waddepally, Hanumakonda. She further submitted that cell tower is being erected without complying the mandatory requirements of G.O.Ms.No.380, dated

01.08.2013; that petitioner has submitted a reprer sentation dated

28.03.2015 to respondent No.3/District Collector, to t. ,l r'-l'I I 2 construction of cell tower, however, respondent No.3 neither consi'iered the same nor taken any action. Aggrieved by the same, present writ petition is filed.

4. Learned Standing counsel for respondent-No.2 would submit that tlre State has issued G.o.Ms.N o.2, dated. lg.o2.2o2l inplace of G.().Ms.No.380, dated 01.0g.20[3, and issued comprehensive guidelines to simplifi and streamline the process of giving permissions to install teregraph infrastructures in Urban and Rural areas c'f Telangana, as per which, the Additional Collector of the Local Body is nominated as Nodal officer for the District. He further subrnitted that any person aggrieved by the decision of local authorities or for such other grievdnces related to Telecom Infrastnrcture in any District, may approach the District Nodar officer i.e., Additionar colrector (LB), who shalr be the First Appellate Authority and any person aggrieved by the decision of locavno,lal authorities or any order of the state Govemment or for such other grievances related to Telecom infrastructure in the State, may approach the DRo, who shalr be the Second Appeilate Authorit'r, and any person aggrieved by the decision of DRo, rnay approach the state Telecom committee (sTC), which shail be the Third Ap rellate Authority i rf, <;, ,,.,, '. ! \ To ]3. ,,, ,:,. .:: ,i , .' :r, .

5. Learned Standing counsel for respondent No.4 would stLb.m.it that tn vtew oI altemative rem'edy available to the petitioner, this . . writ petition is not maintainable and petitioner can approach Nodal Officer, who is Additional Collector of the Local Body for redressal of his grievance and therefore, this writ petition is not maintainable and prayed this Court to dismiss the writ petition.

6. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing counsel for respondent No.2 as well as learned counsel for respondent No.4, this writ petition is disposed of, granting tiberty to the petitioner to approach Nodal Officer (Additionat Collector of the Local Body) within a period of three (03) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on receipt of representation, the District Nodal Officer shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with taw within a period of four (04) weeks thereafter by duly affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as we[[ as all affected Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand //TRUE COPYII SD/-L.VIJAYA LN(MI ASSISTANT REGISTRARG SECTION OFFICER Development, Secretariat Buildings, Saifabad, Hyderabad.

1. The Secretary, Department of Itlunicipal Administration and 2. The Commissioner, Warrangal Municipal QqOoration, Warrangal. 3. The District collector, w_eggngg!. " - . - ;r* , tJrban . ..:l ,---, r, "r1' :: "lt'-"

4. The Secretary, Union of lndia, Ministry of Communications and lnformation Technology, Department of Telecommunications, Electronics Niketan, 6, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003.

5. One CC to SRl. P. B. VIJAY KUMAR, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP FOR MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEV=LOPMENT ,High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT] 7. One CC to SRl. P. HEMACHANDRA, Advocate [OPUC] 8. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE High Court for the State of Telangana, at 9. One CC to SRl. PASHAM MOHIT REDDY, SC FOR MUNICIPAL Hyde'rabad [OUT] CoRPoRATTON IOPUC]

10. One CC to DY.SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA IOPUC] 1 1. Two 3D Copies \ BMW HIGH COURT DATED i1511012025 \ \ ORDEIR WP.No .12582 of 2015 S 1 i l{[R 2fl7ti o t * I t DISPO:SING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS #ie : , .., :... -: _. :..?j'ir.i a.." r-':; li t{'