Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Kumaran M.K vs Bharath Sanchar Nigam Limited(Bsnl)

Author: Antony Dominic

Bench: Antony Dominic

       

  

  

 
 
                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                          PRESENT:

                      THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC

               WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JULY 2012/20TH ASHADHA 1934

                                WP(C).No. 30386 of 2010 (W)
                                    ---------------------------

PETITIONER(S):
-------------

          1. KUMARAN M.K.,
             MANIYELI HOUSE, NAGANCHERRY, PANIPRA P.O.
             KOTTOAPADY, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM.

          2. SUDHARSANAN N.V.,
             NEDUMPURAM HOUSE, NAGANCHERRY, PANIPRA P.O.
             KOTTOAPADY, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM.

             BY ADVS.SRI.AUGUSTINE JOSEPH
                    SRI.K.S.ROCKEY

RESPONDENT(S):
--------------

          1. BHARATH SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED(BSNL),
             REP. BY THE DIVISIONAL ENGINEER, TELECOM
             KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM.

          2. THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER(NPD-1),
             BSNL MOBILE SERVICES, RTO BUILDINGS, LUKAS LANE
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

          3. THE SUB DIVISIONAL ENGIENEER(BSS),
             BSNL MOBILE SERVICES, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM.

          4. KOTTAPPADY GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
             REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, KOTTAPPADY, KOTHAMANGALAM
             ERNAKULAM.

          5. GIGI CHERIAN,
             THAMARAKUDY HOUSE, NAGANCHERRY, PANIPRA P.O.
             KOTTOAPADY, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM.

             BY ADV. SRI.C.S.RAMANATHAN
             BY ADV. SRI.JOMY GEORGE
             BY ADV. SRI.SEBASTIAN THOMAS
             BY ADV. SRI.M.J.BENNY
             BY SRI.MATHEWS K.PHILIP,SC, BSNL

            THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11-07-2012,
          THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.P.(C).30386/10


                                APPENDIX

EXHIBITS

P1-    TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 12.8.09 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE
4TH RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONERS ALONG WITH OTHER RESIDENTS.

P2-    TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION DATED 11.1.10 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT

P3-    TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE AND MINITES OF THE MEETING OF THE KOTTAPADY
GRAMA PANCHAYAT, DATED 16.1.10

P4-    TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE KOTTAPADY GRAMA PANCHAYAT DATED
23.4.10 REJECTING THE APPLICATION TO CONSTRUCT A MOBILE TOWER IN THE 5TH
RESPONDENT PROPERTY

P5-    TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE
TRIBUNAL FOR LOCAL SELF GOVT. INSTITUTIONS IN APPEAL NO.466 OF 2010

P6-    TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 1.7.2010 IN APPEAL NO.466 OF 2010 OF THE
TRIBUNAL FOR LOCAL SELF GOVT. INSTITUTIONS

P7-    TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 26.9.10 SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONERS AND OTHER RESIDENTS.

R1(a)- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23.4.10 OF THE SECRETARY

R1(b)- THE COPY OF THE PERMIT DATED 26.8.10 ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY

R1(c)- THE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30.10.10 OF THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA

R1(d)- THE LETTER DATED 2.2.05 OF THE DIRECTOR, RCC.



                                /true copy/


                                P.A. To Judge



                ANTONY DOMINIC, J
               ........................................
                   W.P.(C).30386/2010
             ..............................................
         Dated this the 11th day of July, 2012

                         JUDGMENT

Writ petition was filed aggrieved by Ext.P6, an order passed by the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions in Appeal No.466/10. That was an appeal filed by the second respondent against an order passed by the Panchayat rejecting its application for permit to construct a telecommunication tower at Nagancherry in Sy.No.90/5A of Thrikariyoor Village, Kothamangalam Taluk.

2. In the affidavit in I.A.9279/12 filed on behalf of respondents 4 and 5 in the writ petition, it is stated that after the filing of the writ petition, it has been decided by the respondents to cancel the site at Nagancherry in Kottapady Grama Panchayat and that the lease agreement with the owner of the land has also been cancelled. Thus, from this affidavit, it is obvious that BSNL does not propose to establish W.P.(C).30386/10 2 the tower as originally decided. Therefore, petitioner need not have any apprehension that the permit will be obtained and tower will be erected in pursuance to Ext.P6 order passed by the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions.

In that view of the matter, recording the aforesaid averments contained in the affidavit in I.A.9279/12, the writ petition is closed.

Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE mrcs /true copy/ PA To Judge