Back
2025 Supreme(Telangana) 1080
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
APARESH KUMAR SINGH, CJ., G.M.MOHIUDDIN, J.
T. Purnachandra chary – Appellant
Versus
Government of Telangana – Respondent
WRIT PETITION No.36517 of 2021 and SUO MOTU W.P(PIL).No.4 of 2024
Decided On : 23-09-2025
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : BODA VINODHAR
For the Respondent: GP FOR REVENUE (TG)
The court confirmed that the Commissioner of Police is authorized to license blasting operations under Section 21(1)(f) of the Hyderabad City Police Act, following all relevant safety regulations and statutory requirements.
Headnote:(A) Hyderabad City Police Act, 1348-F - Section 21(1)(f) - Validity of blasting operations conducted by permit holders - The court upheld that all necessary permissions and statutory compliance were adhered to for blasting operations, nullifying claims of illegality - The petitioners sought a declaration that the refusal to act on their representation was unlawful. (Paras 2, 7, 9)
(B) Public Interest Litigation - Parameters - The court acknowledged the suo motu action instigated by local concerns regarding blasting activities affecting residents as part of the public interest domain. (Paras 2, 9)
Facts of the case:
Petitioners challenged the inaction of the government regarding blasting activities allegedly affecting their community. The concerned respondent had obtained permits for blasting operations, which were conducted in compliance with regulations.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the blasting was executed within the legal framework and that no illegality had taken place in granting the necessary permissions.
Issues: The core issue addressed was whether the blasting operations were conducted legally and with due permissions from the relevant authorities.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reiterated that the Commissioner of Police possesses the authority to grant licenses for blasting based on statutory provisions and that the operations conducted had followed the requisite protocols to ensure safety and legality.
Result: Writ petition and Suo Motu W.P(PIL) closed, with no order as to costs.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to the legality of construction activities (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. affidavits regarding blasting permissions (Para 4) |
| 3. statutory compliance for permissions noted (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. regulatory framework for blasting in hyderabad (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. petition closed due to compliance (Para 9 , 10) |
ORDER:
Heard Ms. Ch.Mounika, learned counsel representing Mr. Boda Vinodhar, learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.No.36517 of 2021, Mr. P.Sri Raghuram, learned Senior Counsel representing Mr. Arvind Geedipelli, learned counsel for respondent No.5 in W.P.No.36517 of 2021, Mr. Mohammed Imran Khan, learned Additional Advocate General appears for respondent Nos.1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 in SUO MOTU W.P(PIL).No.4 of 2024, Mr. Zeeshan Adnan Mahmood, learned Standing Counsel for the Telangana State Pollution Control Board appears for respondent No.11 in W.P.No.36517 of 2021 and respondent No.4 in SUO MOTU W.P(PIL).No.4 of 2024 and Mr. K.Goutham Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Industries and Commerce, Mines and Geology Department appears for respondent Nos.9 and 12 in W.P.No.36517 of 2021.
2. Writ petition was preferred for declaring the action of the respondents particularly respondent No.2 in not taking action on the representation of the petitioners dated 24.11.2021 as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional. Petitioners also prayed for stoppage of illegal activities conducted by respondent No.5 in the site situated at Survey No.403 of Padmalaya Ambedkarnagar Basti, where certain construction activities and blasting were being carried. A public interest litigation was also instituted suo motu by this Court at the instance of a letter addressed by one of the sitting Judges of this Court on a news article published in “Times of India” English Daily Newspaper dated 26.08.2024 with headline “24x7 blasting clears hillock, irks locals in Jubilee Hills community”.
3. In the present proceedings, learned Additional Advocate General representing respondent Nos.1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 in Suo Motu W.P(PIL).No.4 of 2024, learned Standing Counsel for the Telangana State Pollution Control Board and learned Senior Counsel for the private respondent appeared and filed their counter affidavits.
4. On behalf of respondent No.5, specific affidavit was filed stating that after due permission from the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad, who is respondent No.14 in W.P.No.36517 of 2021 and respondent No.8 in Suo Motu W.P(PIL).No.4 of 2024, the blasting operations have been carried out. The operations have come to a close on 03.06.2025.
5. On the previous occasion, learned Additional Advocate General was allowed time to get complete instructions on the issue referred to in the order dated 28.08.2025 as regards the competent authority, who is empowered under the relevant statute to permit use of explosives for carrying out blasting at the site in question since there appear to be some doubt as to the powers of the Commissioner of City Police, Hyderabad to grant such permission where use of explosives are required for blasting within the precincts of the city.
6. A comprehensive affidavit has been filed by the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad. The relevant extract of the affidavit is incorporated hereunder:
“4. It is further respectfully submitted that the said M/s. Patel Mining and Infra Projects submitted representation dated. 12.05.2021 wherein they stated that, they are having Technical Data, safety procedures and precautions in connection with Hard Rock Excavation works with mild controlled blasting operation for the above said Project. The said firm of M/s. Patel Mining and Infra Projects also claimed to be doing the control blasting operations, since last 25 years in and around Hyderabad for various projects, in Cyberabad, Hyderabad and Rachakonda Commissionerate limits, without any incident or near miss at any of its projects. The said firm, in its covering letter also stated that it follows and strictly implements the procedures and safety precautio
