B. Navamani Raju v. Vijayawada Municipal Corporation

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE B. SIVA SANKARA RAO WRIT PETITION No.45050 of 2017 ORDER:

Heard both sides.

2.

While directing respondent Nos.1 and 2 to consider the representation of the petitioner, the writ petition is disposed of. Needless to say, the 1st respondent without asking the 3rd respondent to obtain certificate from the 2nd respondent cannot permit the erection of the Tele Communication Infrastructure Tower. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. No costs.

____________________________ Dr. B. SIVA SANKARA RAO, J 18th January 2018 mar