Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.21 seconds)

Vikas Luthra vs M.C.D. And Ors on 5 May, 2016

21. Learned counsel for respondent No.5 also relied upon a subsequent issuance of the guidelines by the Department of Telecommunications dated 01.08.2013 as per Annexure R3 wherein it is stated that on roof towers of even 19 residential buildings, such erection of mobile towers are permissible. Further, the Government has issued another notification as per Annexure-R6 dated 02.03.2005 in No. NaCe GEL 2005. By means of that, the Government has permitted to put up the towers even on residential buildings subject to certain conditions, i.e., they must take care of the capacity of the building and proper care has to be taken and they have to pay necessary taxes and also follow all the rules and regulations of the Government. If those contentions are fulfilled, such mobile towers can also be erected. So far as health hazards are concerned, he has produced World Health Organization's report, which is also relied upon by the High Court of Delhi in W(C) 6525/2012 between Vikas Luthra V. M.C.D. And Ors. Decided on 05.05.2016.
Delhi High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 2 - A K Pathak - Full Document

The Divisional Manager The New India ... vs Sri Mohd Ghouse on 3 March, 2010

29. Under the above said facts and circumstances, it is just and necessary at the cost of repetition to note here, when the disputed facts are there before the Court, whether under the Writ Jurisdiction remedy can be granted. It is in this regard it is worth to note here a decision of the apex Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Gouse Mohammad reported in AIR 1961 SC 1526, wherein the apex Court has observed:
Karnataka High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 1 - A S Bopanna - Full Document
1