THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU W.P.No.30020 OF 2011 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking to issue a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in interfering with the operation/functioning of cellular tower over the building in premises bearing D.No.27-1-65/1, Vidyanagar, Srinagar, Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh by the petitioner Company without assigning any notice whatsoever as illegal and arbitrary. 2. It is stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition that the petitioner identified the aforementioned site for the purpose of erection of the tower basing on the requirement of the operator. After following the due procedure, petitioner erected the cellular tower and operating the same since the month of May, 2008. In the meanwhile, Government issued G.O.Ms.No.183 and the petitioner company challenged the validity of clause Nos.1 and 4 of the said G.O. by filing W.P.No.11153 of 2009 and an interim direction was granted to respondent to consider the application in accordance with the said G.O. but without reference to clauses 1 and 4 thereof. The petitioner did not choose to challenge the same as there is no difficulty in complying with the other conditions notwithstanding the competence of the State Government and the local authorities are insisting upon obtaining permission. This Court passed order in W.P.No.10360 of 2009 and batch to process the applications of the petitioners seeking permission to erect or install the cell phone towers and ancillary machinery without reference to Clauses 1 and 4 of the 4th paragraph of the said G.O. and that shall be without prejudice to the right of the Municipal Corporations and Corporation to verify the structural stability of the building or the soil, as the case may be, as well as their right to levy the fee and it shall be open to the Municipal Corporations and Municipalities to apply these very yardstick to the towers, which have already been installed. So, the petitioner submitted an application on 03.06.2010 by complying all the requirements and requested to grant permission for the tower already erected in the year 2008. He also enclosed the structural stability report and certificate to establish that the building is capable of bearing the load and submitted undertakings with regard to damage to the building and public in general. The petitioner company is regulated by the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (for short, ‘the Act’.) and the Central Government grants the license under Section 4. The Central Government conferred power upon the private cellular telephone service operators like the petitioner to seek way- leave from the owner of the immovable property to place and maintain telephone lines, posts in or upon such property. While so, the officials of the respondent Municipality have been interfering with the functioning of the tower on the ground that the tower will create radiation and are threatening to cut the operations from the tower without issuing any notice. Hence, the present writ petition. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner company contended that without there being any notice, the officials of the respondent Corporation are interfering with the functioning of the cellular tower of the petitioner company and therefore, he prays to issue a direction to the respondent Corporation. 4. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Corporation contended that the respondent is not interfering with the cellular tower of the petitioner and if any complaint is received from any quarter, then the respondent will take appropriate decision after issuing a notice to the petitioner. 5. The grievance of the petitioner is that the officials of the respondent Corporation are interfering with the operation/functioning of cellular tower over the building in premises bearing D.No.27-1-65/1, Vidyanagar, Srinagar, Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam. On instructions, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Corporation contended that the Corporation is not interfering with the functioning of the cellular tower. Recording the said submission, the respondent Corporation is directed to take appropriate action as per law if any complaint is received from any quarter after issuing a notice to the petitioner company. 6. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ K.C.BHANU, J 11th November, 2011. AMD THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU W.P.No.30020 OF 2011 Date: 11.11.2011 AMD