IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
TUESDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021/15TH POUSHA, 1942
WP(C).No.8621 OF 2019(C)
PETITIONERS:
1 ANIL KUMAR E.M., S/O. MANIAN PILLAI,
AGED 42 YEARS, RESIDING AT EDAVANA,
KAVUMBHAGOM P.O., THIRUVALLA 689 102.
2 REJI MATHEW,S/O. VARGHESE MAMMEN,
AGED 52 YEARS, RESIDING AT
CHANDRAVIRUTHIL HOUSE, MANNAMKARACIRA,
THIRUVALLA 689 102.
3 RAJESH KUMAR M.S.,S/O. SASIDHARAN NAIR,
AGED 42 YEARS, RESIDING AT MELATTU HOUSE,
MANNAMKARACHIRA, KAVUMBHAGOM, THIRUVALLA 689 102.
BY ADVS.
SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON
SRI.P.S.APPU
SMT.G.AMBILY
RESPONDENTS:
1 INDUS TOWERS LTD., 8TH FLOOR,
VENKARATH TOWER, COCHIN,
NH BY PASS, PALARIVATTOM,
EDAPPALLY, ERNAKULAM 682 024.
2 M.G. VENUGOPAL, S/O. THANGAMMA,
RADHAMANDHIRAM, MANNAMKARACHIRA,
KAVUMBHAGOM P.O., THIRUVALLA,
PATHANAMTHITTA 689 102.
3 THE SECRETARY,
THIRUVALLA MUNICIPALITY,
PATHANAMTHITTA 682 101.
4 DISTRICT TELECOM COMMITTEE
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN,
DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PATHANAMTHITTA,
WP(C)No.8621/2019
2
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT 689 101.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE
R1 BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS T.VARGHESE
R1 BY ADV. SMT.ACHU SUBHA ABRAHAM
R1 BY ADV. SMT.V.T.LITHA
R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER
R3 BY SRI.S.SUBHASH CHAND, SC, THIRUVALLA
MUNICIPALITY
GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. RASHMI K.M.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY
HEARD ON 05.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C)No.8621/2019
3
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 5th day of January, 2021 The writ petition has been filed seeking to quash Ext.P1 and direct the 4th respondent to consider objections raised by the petitioners and other residents of the locality where the 1st respondent proposes to install a telecom tower as per Ext.P1 building permit.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that a telecom tower is being constructed in a "Thodu Puramboke" area and the construction is going on. The petitioners have produced Ext.P5 mass petition submitted before the Municipal Secretary, Thiruvalla, pointing out that there are Schools and Libraries functioning close to the proposed telecom tower and the place where the telecom tower is proposed to be erected is a converted wet land. Therefore the construction would be illegal and against WP(C)No.8621/2019 4 public interest, contended the learned counsel for the petitioners.
3. As regards the complaint placed before the 3 rd respondent - Municipal Secretary, Thiruvalla, the learned standing counsel appearing for the 3 rd respondent would submit that the issue of telecom tower is pending consideration before the District Telecom Committee and the petitioners have placed their grievance before the District Telecom Committee.
4. The 1st respondent would submit that the writ petition is frivolous and the pendency of the writ petition is causing considerable difficulties to the 1st respondent in as much as they cannot start construction of the telecom tower. The writ petition is therefore liable to be dismissed, as the issue is pending before a competent Forum, contended the learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent.
5. The 4th respondent-District Telecom Committee has filed a counter affidavit in which it has been stated that WP(C)No.8621/2019 5 the 4th respondent has gathered information and reports from the 3rd respondent and the 3rd respondent has stated that the site where the telecom tower is proposed is not a 'thodu' or 'road puramboke'. The learned counsel for the 4 th respondent submits that the complaint of the 1 st respondent is received by the 4th respondent on 04.02.2019 and it was taken for consideration by the District Telecom Committee convened on 11.02.2019. A report was called for from Thiruvalla Municipality as to whether the construction of the telecom tower is in 'thodu puramboke'. Now due to the pendency of the writ petition the 4 th respondent has not proceeded with the issue.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that though the sanction granted was for construction of telecom tower in a place other than a 'thodu puramboke', now actual construction is on a 'thodu puramboke'. Therefore a physical inspection of the site may be necessary.
WP(C)No.8621/2019 6
7. Heard.
In the circumstances of the case, this Court deem it not necessary to adjudicate the issue involved in the writ petition now, since the issue is pending before the competent Forum namely District Telecom Committee. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 4 th respondent to take appropriate decision in the matter in accordance with law after hearing the petitioners, 3rd respondent and other affected parties within a period of two months.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH JUDGE ncd WP(C)No.8621/2019 7 APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT AND SKETCH OBTAINED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 17-09-2018.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATIOND ATED 29-
01-2019.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LOCATION SKETCH DATED 17-05-2018.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY PTA DATED NIL.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION BEFORE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 31-1-2019.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION DATED 19-2-
2019.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 26-2-2019. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT R1 TRUE COPY OF MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 22.02.2019. EXHIBIT R1(a) TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 02.03.2019.