Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Indus Towers Limited vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 25 February, 2020
Author: U. Durga Prasad Rao
Bench: U. Durga Prasad Rao
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE U. DURGA PRASAD RAO
WRIT PETITION No.4306 of 2020
ORDER:
The petitioner seeks a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of 3rd respondent in not providing police protection to the petitioner for erection of Telecommunication Infrastructure Tower (TIT) at S.No.875-1/B, Kandukur Town, Prakasam District, as illegal and arbitrary and violation of Section 33 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 and for a consequential direction.
2. The petitioner's case is that, the petitioner is an infrastructure company (IP-I) incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, came into existence on 20.11.2007, responsible for providing cell site towers / equipments in order to provide mobile coverage to the public at large through various cell operators in the country. The Central Government also granted necessary registration certificate to the petitioner to provide Telecom Infrastructure (IP-I) on Pan India basis including erstwhile State of Andhra Pradesh. In the light of the registration certificate, the petitioner is required to erect and install mobile telecom equipment such as Ground Based Towers, Roof Top Towers and fixing of Antennas and signal Tran receiving equipment etc. and providing the same for the purpose of various telecom service providers. While so, the petitioner - company had identified place in the aforesaid survey number in Kandukur Town, Prakasam District, and after entering into lease and license agreement with its owner, 2 submitted an application dated 12.11.2019 to 2nd respondent, for grant of permission for erection of tower, duly complying all the requirements. In terms of guideline D (i) of G.O.Ms.No.146 Municipal Administration & Urban Development (M2) Department dated 19.06.2015 "if no permission or refusal is accorded within 30 days, the permit is deemed to have been accorded, provided that, the said installation shall comply all of these guidelines". The 2nd respondent did not dispose of the above application and therefore, in tune with above guidelines, the petitioner has issued a letter dated 18.12.2019 to the 2nd respondent invoking the deemed clause.
While so, when the petitioner company representatives started erection of cell tower, the local people started resisting them from erecting the tower stating that the radiation which would be emanated from the tower would be dangerous to the people. Therefore, the petitioner was constrained to give a representation to the 3rd respondent on 28.01.2020 seeking police protection, but till date the 2nd respondent neither considered their representation nor provided police protection.
Hence, this writ petition.
3. Heard Sri T.D.Phani Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Home, representing respondents 1 & 3 and Sri M.Manohar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel, representing 2nd respondent.
3
4. Learned counsel the petitioner would submit that so far the representation given by the petitioner on 27.01.2020 for providing police protection is not considered by 3rd respondent. He would further submit that the police are bound to provide protection, once permission is granted by the authorities. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on the judgment of the Madras High Court in Crl.O.P.No.14444 of 2019 dated 07.06.2019, wherein it was held thus:
6. This Court has consistently taken the view that no one can be prevented from erecting the cell phone towers on a mere apprehension about the effect of radiation from the cell phone tower. The apprehension does not have a scientific backing.
Till a positive finding is given in this regard, cell phone towers cannot be prevented to be installed on mere apprehensions.
7. For the reasons stated above, there shall be a direction to the second respondent police to provide police protection to the petitioner for erection of the cell phone tower. The second respondent police shall ensure that the entire process goes on in a smooth manner, without giving raise to any law and order problem.
5. In that view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to provide police protection to the petitioner for erection of Telecommunication Infrastructure Tower (TIT) at S.No.875-1/B, Kandukur Town, Prakasam District and to ensure that the entire process will be done in a smooth manner without any scope for law and order problem. No costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed.
__________________________ U. DURGA PRASAD RAO, J 25th February, 2020 PVD