Kerala High Court
Indus Towers Ltd vs The Superintendent Of Police on 10 January, 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE DR. MANJULA CHELLUR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE
FRIDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF MARCH 2014/7TH CHAITHRA, 1936
WP(C).No. 6145 of 2014 (P)
---------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
--------------------------
1. INDUS TOWERS LTD
VANKARATH TOWER, 8TH FLOOR, N.H.BYEPASS
PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI-24
REPRESENTED BY ITS DULY AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
PREMAKRISHNAN NAIR.M.N., HEAD LEGAL.
2. BHARATHI INFRATEL LIMITED
REPRESENTED BY PREMAKRISHNAN NAIR.M.N.
HEAD LEGAL INDUS TOWERS LIMITED, VANKARATH TOWER
8TH FLOOR, N.H. BYEPASS, PALARIVATTOM
KOCHI-24.
BY ADV. SRI.P.SATHISAN
RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------
1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 695503.
2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
PARASALA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT
PINM 695503.
3. KOLLAYIL GRAMA PANCHAYATH
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PERUMKADAVILA
NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695503.
4. RAJENDRAN NAIR
S/O.BALAKRISHNAN, RT NIVAS, OM MALAYILKKADA
MANCHAVILAKOM P.O., NEYYATTINKARA
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 695503.
5. BALAKRISHNAN ACHARI
S/O.VISWAMBHARAN ACHARI, SANTHI BHAVAN, OMMALAYILKKADA
MANCHAVILAKOM P.O., NEYYATTINKARA
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 695503.
6. SUDHAKARAN NAIR
S/O.BALAN PILLAI, VASANTHALAYAM, OM MALAYIKKADA
MANCHAVILAKOM P.O., NEYYATTINKARA
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 695503.
WPC 6145/14
7. SHIBU
S/O.RAJAN, ROADARIKATHU VEEDU, MANCHAVILAKOM
MANCHAVILAKOM P.O., NEYYATTINKARA
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 695503.
8. ANTI MOBILE TELECOMMUNICATION TOWER ACTION GROUP
KOLLAYIL GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY VINOD
S/O.SUKUMARAN NAIR, VINOD BHAVAN, VADAKARA
MARAYAMUTTAM P.O., PIN 695503.
9. DEPUTY DIRECTOR GENERAL, TELECOM ENFORCEMENT AND
RESOURCES MONITORING CELL
GANDHI NAGAR COCHIN.
R4-R8 BY ADV. SRI.A.B.MOHANAKUMAR
R3 BY ADV. SRI.T.K.ANANDA KRISHNAN
R3 BY ADV. SRI.K.P.RANADIVE
R1,R2 BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SUJITH MATHEW JOSE
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28-03-
2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 6145 of 2014 (P)
---------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-------------------------------------
EXHIBIT-P1: TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE
PETITIONER DATED 10.01.2008.
EXHIBIT-P2: TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT NOTIFICATION CONFERRING THE STATUS
OF TELEGRAPH AUTHORITY ON THE PETITIONERS WITH TRANSLATIONS
EXHIBIT-P3: TRUE COPY OF THE USE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT
DATED 21.3.2012.
EXHIBIT-P4: TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE GUIDELINE ISSUED
BY THE TELECOM REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA DATED 11.4.2007.
EXHIBIT-P4(a): TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY GOVERNMENT OF KERALA
DATED 16.09.2008.
EXHIBIT-P5: TRUE COPY OF THE GUIDELINES ISSUED BY GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
DATED 10.12.2010 REGARDING RADIATION NORMS ON EMF EXPOSURE OF BTS.
EXHIBIT-P6: TRUE COPY OF THE GUIDELINES ISSUED BY GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
DATED 11.10.2010 REGARDING RADIATION NORMS AND IMPOSITION OF
PENALTY IN CASE OF VIOLATION OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF LICENSE.
EXHIBIT-P7: COPY OF THE CIRCULAR ISSUED BY DEPARTMENT OF TELECOM TO
REDUCE THE POWER DENSITY OF EMISSIONS FROM THE TOWER TO 1/10TH
WITH EFFECT FROM 1.9.2012.
EXHIBIT-P8: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND
RESPONDENT DATED 17/12/2013
EXHIBIT-P9: TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO EXHIBIT-P4 COMPLAINT
WITH TRANSLATION
//TRUE COPY//
PS TO JUDGE.
MANJULA CHELLUR, C.J
&
A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J.
---------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.6145 OF 2014
---------------------------------------------
Dated this the 28th day of March, 2014
JUDGMENT
Manjula Chellur,C.J Petitioners are before this court seeking police protection contending that party respondents without any recourse to legal remedies and in spite of petitioners having necessary permission and license to put up telecom tower, are trying to trespass into Cell site and obstruct the operation thereunder. According to the learned counsel representing the party respondents 4 to 8 entire construction of the telecom tower is in violation of the building rules. Therefore, they had to lodge a complaint to the respondent Panchayath. Learned Standing counsel for respondent Panchayath submits, it has come to the knowledge that the petitioners have violated building rules and have constructed the tower in question and WPC 6145/14 2 they have decided to take suitable action for the same. In this connection they have already affixed notice on the premises of the petitioners informing the proposed action. In the light of the above situation, we are afraid under the guise of police protection petitioners cannot be allowed to continue with the operation in the building which is put up in violation of the building rules. If any other remedy is available to the petitioners challenging the proposed action of the respondent Panchayath they are at liberty to seek such remedy.
Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed.
(MANJULA CHELLUR) CHIEF JUSTICE.
(A.M.SHAFFIQUE) JUDGE.
uj.