Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

In the return filed by the respondent no.16-GTL Infrastructure Ltd., in addition to what has been stated by Cellular Operators Association of India and DoT and other contesting respondents, it was submitted that Indian Mobile Industry is a major contributor to the social and economic growth of the country; there is exponential growth of mobile subscribers; in case EMF radiation is kept within limit, there is no health hazard; there is economic policy issued; question of proportionality is also involved; development cannot be hampered; National Telecom Policy, 1999 and TRAI recommendations on infrastructure sharing have also been relied upon; with respect to environmental hazard, there is no conclusive evidence; the decision of Kerala High Court has been relied upon; persons standing directly in front of the antenna in high density zones will get higher exposures; there are two types of effects of electro magnetic waves; thermal and non-thermal, which includes electro physiological behavioural effects; these can be sleep disorders, cognitive disorders, memory disturbances, hearing disorders etc.; subjective symptoms such as sleep disorders, cognitive disorders, memory disturbances, hearing disorders etc. have been reported, however, the studies pertaining to base stations conducted by Santini R et al (2002), Bortkiewicz et al (2004) and Hutter & Kundi et al (2006) do not report any quantitative parameters related to health hazards; more objective research is needed to quantify the effect on human health; National Authorities should adopt international standards as per WHO; the Committee, which was constituted, on the basis of the above findings, recommended that precautionary approach should be adopted; various datas have been referred to.

Reliance has been placed by the learned counsel for the petitioners on the decision of the Italian Supreme Court dated 12.10.2012 in ICEMS Vs ICNIRP; Hardell vs Interphone where compensation has been granted to incumbent due to suffering with brain tumor; the Italian Supreme Court affirmed the tumor risk from long term use of a cell phone.

It was further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that reports which have been filed and relied upon by the Cellular Operators Association of India and other Infrastructure Service Providers simply lay down conditionally that in case EMF radiation level is kept below the level prescribed, there is no confirming studies that it would cause health hazard; studies are not conclusive to negate even with respect health hazard being caused by low level EMF radiation. They have relied upon the Inter-Ministerial Report to contend that in case radiation level is kept higher, in case there is violation of norms and as there is no continuous monitoring available so as to find out whether EMF radiation level is being kept at the prescribed level; even for checking of 10% done by TERM, instrument is provided by the service providers for which fee of Rs.10,000/- has been provided; merely because penalty of Rs.5 lacs and closing down of service after one month in case of non-compliance is provided, it cannot be said to be enough to set at naught precautionary approach in case of violation, even otherwise EMF radiation is adversely affecting the human beings and in some of the hospitals also, use of mobile phone has been stopped; imposition of fine and cancellation of license cannot be said to be enough; no right can be claimed by the service providers to install the towers and antenna at the place of their choice; there can be regulation to provide a place where towers can be installed; mobile towers and antennas are dangerous as the safeguards which have been laid down, are by and large not being followed and people are not informed of them and level of EMF radiation is more near the antennas and thus, the State Government has rightly decided by enacting Bye-laws as a precautionary approach not to install tower on schools, colleges, hospitals, play grounds and within 500 meters from jail premises; several crimes are being committed from jail by using mobile phones for which separate PIL is pending before this Court; crimes from jail have been recently reported at Jodhpur as well as Ajmer by using mobile phones; jammers are not working effectively; they are not successful to prohibit use of mobile by accused from jail premises and thus, the State Government has rightly taken the decision to remove the towers within vicinity of 500 meters from jail premises; the decision has been taken to ensure safety, prevention of crimes and law and order; Bye-laws have been framed considering the health hazard being caused by EMF radiation from mobile towers and thus, they are in public interest.

Mr.Gopal Subramanyam, learned Senior Counsel has further submitted with regard to allegation of health hazard, the electro magnetic spectrum can be divided into two parts; non-ionizing and ionizing. Non-ionizing part cannot lead to tissue damage whereas ionizing radiation can cause cancer. The learned Senior Counsel has relied upon ICNIRP report recognized by WHO consisting of experts and standards laid down for EMF radiation are being followed globally; he has heavily relied upon the level of EMF radiation prescribed by WHO and observations made by it in the fact sheets of December, 2005 and May, 2006 and submitted that the level of RF exposure from base stations and wireless networks are so low which does not in any manner affect human health; as per WHO, recent survey indicated that EMF radiation exposures from base stations and wireless technologies in publicly accessible areas including schools and hospitals are normally thousands of times below international standards. The learned Senior Counsel has also relied upon various other reports which will be discussed later on laying down in case EMF radiation level is kept at the level below the prescribed limit, it would not cause any health hazard, however, if EMF radiation level is higher than prescribed limit, it is not disputed that it may cause damage to the health.

The learned Additional Advocate General on behalf of State Government has further submitted that no case for interference is made out with respect to schools as order of this Court has already attained finality, that part of petition stands disposed off and since order has not been interfered with by the Supreme Court and SLP preferred by the Cellular Operators Association of India has been dismissed by the Supreme Court, on the parity of same reasoning, the impugned bye-laws are liable to be upheld; there will be health hazard in case the towers are permitted on the hospitals, play-grounds etc.; from the schools, towers have already been removed in compliance of the order issued by this Court and this fact has not been disputed at bar even by the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of COAI and other respondents; there is public concern regarding health hazard being caused by reckless erection of mobile towers in a haphazard manner and EMF radiation from such mobile towers; there are reports of public unrest due to health hazard caused by EMF radiation from mobile towers and handsets; it has been observed by the Inter Ministerial Committee that in case level of EMF radiation is higher, it would cause health hazard in various manner; hospital is a sensitive place where infants, newly born children, pregnant women, patients of various diseases are treated, they are vulnerable and they require protection from EMF radiation from mobile tower and thus, if towers are not removed from hospitals, it would enhance the agony of the patients taking treatment of various diseases in the hospitals; EMF radiations are more harmful for infants and pregnant women; even taking of mobile is not permissible in some of the hospitals and thus, decision of the State Government restricting installation of tower on the hospital is just, proper and reasonable and in the public interest. Similarly, the decision of the State Government restricting installation of mobile tower within 500 meters from jail premises is also to ensure public safety and law and order as there are many instances which show that accused makes conspiracy and commits offence from jail by using the mobile handsets; though jammers are installed, but they are not successful and failed to provide the requisite insulation. Thus, the decision taken by the State Government restricting installation of mobile towers on the schools, colleges, hospitals, play grounds and the place within 500 meters from the jail premises is in the public interest, safety and to ensure law and order; the action cannot in any manner be said to be illegal or arbitrary. Apart from this, there is no restriction to carry on business; erection of tower can be regulated; COAI and Infrastructure Providers cannot claim any vested right to install tower at a particular place; they can carry on business effectively by erecting the tower at the place permissible and provide coverage.