Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Chinta Venkataiah vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 25 November, 2025
1
HN, J
W.P.No.29084_2025
APHC010561242025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3457]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
WRIT PETITION NO: 29084/2025
Between:
1. CHINTA VENKATAIAH, CHINTA VENKATAIAH, C/O. CHINTA
OBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O. H. NO. 26-09-1051
SAPTAGIRI NAGAR, RASI LAYOUT, OLD VEDAYAPALEM, SPSR
NELLORE -524004.
2. KATHI HARIBABU, S/O. KATHI CHINNA PENCHAIAH, AGED ABOUT
42 YEARS, R/O. H. NO. 26/9/1087, OLD VEDAYAPALEM,
ARUNDHATHIWADA , ANDHARAKESARI NAGAR, SPSR NELLORE-
524004.
3. SREERAM PANDURANGA VITTAL,, S/O. SREERAM RAMANAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/O. H. NO. 25-13-1298, PEDDA BAVI
CENTER, NEAR RAMALAYAM TEMPLE, UMMAREDDYGUNTA ,
ANDHRAKESARI NAGAR, SPSR NELLORE- 524004.
4. THOTA PRABHAKAR,, C/O. RAMANAIAH, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
R/O. PLOT NO. 56, RASI LAYOUT, OLD VEDAYAPALEM, SPSR
NELLORE- 524004.
5. NANDIMANDALAM NARAYANA RAJU, S/O. NANDIMANDALAM
VENKATA RAJU AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, R/O. H. NO. 26-9-956/2,
SAPTHIGIRI COLONY, VEDAYAPALEM NELLORE, ANDHRAKESARI
NAGAR, SPSR NELLORE, 524004
6. ARIKTIA MASTHAN NAIDU, S/O. PEDDA VEERAPA NAIDU, AGED
ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/O. H. NO. 2/43, NARASINGARAO PETA, WEST
GUDUR, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT, 52410
2
HN, J
W.P.No.29084_2025
7. KASUMURU VENKAIAH, C/O. KASAMURU EDUKONDALU AGED
ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/O. H. NO. 26-9-780, JANASHAKTHI NAGAR,
NEAR G V R R COLLEGE, VEDAYAAPALEM NELLORE,
ANDHARAKESARI NAGAR, SPSR NELLORE, 524004.
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY (MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION) SECRETARIAT
BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE NELLORE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, NELLORE., REP. BY
ITS COMMISSIONER
3. THE CITY PLANNER, NELLORE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION,
NELLORE.
4. THE INDUS TOWERS LIMITED, NEW D NO. 24/6/148, SARASWATHI
NAGAR, DARGAMITTA, NELLORE., REP. BY ITS MANAGER.
5. SHAIK ABDUL GAFFAR, S/O. GOUSE MOHIDDIN, AGED MAJOR,
PLOT NO.4, SY NO. 63/7, 63/8, 63/9, NEAR D.NO.1610, WARD 26-1,
VEDAYAPALEM, NELLO
...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 topleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in
the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS by declaring the inaction of the
Respondent No.2, for not considering the representation, dated 01.09.2025,
of the petitioners in respect of raising objections on erecting Cell Tower by
the Respondent No.4 in the site of the Respondent No.5 situated at Plot
No.4, Sy No. 63/7, 63/8, 63/9, Rasi Layout, Near D.No.1610, Ward 26-1,
Vedayapalem, Nellore., further issuing Proceedings Roc No.
50/1031/NLR/TT/2025, dated 19.08.2025 by the Respondent No.2, to the
Respondent No.4, by granting permission for erecting the Cell Tower without
considering public grievances under relevant Municipal and Telecom Tower
Regulations or following due procedure of law as arbitrary, illegal, and
violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21, and 300-A of the Constitution of India
and consequently set aside the Proceedings Roc No. 50/1031/NLR/TT/2025,
3
HN, J
W.P.No.29084_2025
dated 19.08.2025 of the Respondent No.2, by granting permission for
erecting the Cell Tower to the Respondent No.4 and pass
IA NO: 1 OF 2025
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
Pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in pursuant to Roc No.
50/1031/NLR/TT/2025, dated 19.08.2025 of the Respondent No.2, in respect
of granting permission for erecting the Cell Tower to the Respondent No.4 at
Plot No.4, Sy No. 63/7, 63/8, 63/9, Rasi Layout, Near D.No. 1610, Ward 26-1,
Vedayapalem, Nellore and pass
Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. V ROOPESH KUMAR REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP
4
HN, J
W.P.No.29084_2025
ORDER:
1. This writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioners seeking the following relief/s.
"to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS by declaring the inaction of the Respondent No.2, for not considering the representation, dated 01.09.2025, of the petitioners in respect of raising objections on erecting Cell Tower by the Respondent No.4 in the site of the Respondent No.5 situated at Plot No.4, Sy.No.63/7, 63/8, 63/9, Rasi Layout, Near D.No.1610, Ward 26-1, Vedayapalem, Nellore., further issuing Proceedings Roc No. 50/1031/NLR/TT/2025, dated 19.08.2025 by the Respondent No.2, to the Respondent No.4, by granting permission for erecting the Cell Tower without considering public grievances under relevant Municipal and Telecom Tower Regulations or following due procedure of law as arbitrary, illegal, and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21, and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the Proceedings Roc No. 50/1031/NLR/TT/2025, dated 19.08.2025 of the Respondent No.2, by granting permission for erecting the Cell Tower to the Respondent No.4 and pass".
2. The petitioners are aggrieved by the orders passed by the 2nd respondent granting permission to the 4th respondent for erecting a cell tower. The petitioners are residents of the layout situated in Survey No.63/7, 63/8, 63/9, Rasi Layout, near D.No.1610, Ward 26-1, 5 HN, J W.P.No.29084_2025 Vedayapalem, Nellore and they are concerned about the proposed erection of the cell by the 4th respondent. In that process, the 2nd respondent has accorded clearance for the erection of the cell tower without duly considering the objections submitted by the petitioners.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri A.S.C.Bose, learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.2 and 3.
4. The learned Standing counsel submits that the grievance raised by the petitioners falls within the domain of the Telecom Enforcement, Resources and Monitoring (TERM) Cell of the Department of Telecommunications, Government of India, which is the authority empowered to deal with complaints relating to mobile tower emissions, safety standards, and compliance under the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 and the DoT's radiation and infrastructure norms. It is further submitted that this Court, in similar matters, has already taken the view that grievances regarding mobile tower installations must be addressed before the TERM Cell. Reliance is placed on the orders passed by this Court in W.P.Nos.29089 of 2025 and 3341 of 2019.
5. Following the orders of this Court in W.P.Nos.29089 of 2025 and 3341 of 2019, the present writ petition stands disposed off, leaving it open to the petitioners to approach the appropriate authority for redressal of their grievance. There shall be no order as to costs. 6
HN, J W.P.No.29084_2025 Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Date:25.11.2025 NKA 7 HN, J W.P.No.29084_2025 38 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 29084 of 2025 Date: 25.11.2025 NKA