[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Residents Of Shivanagar vs Union Of India on 7 February, 2026
Serial No. 21
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
WP(C) No. 3667/2025
Residents of Shivanagar, Kathua .....Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Through the representative
Attin Sharma, Age 37 years;
S/O Sh. Sardari Lal Sharma,
R/O Ward No. 19; Shiva Nagar,
District Kathua-184104.
Through: Mr. Bupinder Anthal, Advocate
vs
1. Union of India, ..... Respondent(s)
Through Private Secretary,
Department of Telecommunication
(DoT), Ministry of Communications,
Sanchar Bhawan, 20 Ashoka Road,
New Delhi-110001.
2. The Additional Director General
(ADG), Department of
Telecommunication (DoT), Ground
Floor, HUDCO Bhawan, Rail Head
Complex, Jammu-180012.
3. The Vice Chairman & Managing
Director, Bharti Airtel Limited,
Airtel Center, Plot No. 16, Udyog
Vihar, Phase IV, Gurugram,
Haryana 122015.
4. The Managing Director & CEO,
Indus Tower Limited,
Building No. 10, Tower-A, 4th Floor,
DLF Cyber City,
Gurugram, Haryana, 122002.
5. The Deputy Commissioner,
Kathua.
2
6. The Executive Officer,
Municipal Council,
Kathua-184101.
7. Om Prakash Sharma
S/O Late Sh. Des Raj
R/O-Gali No. 3, Patelnagar, kathua.
Tower Site/Building Address: Ward
No. 16/19, Shivanagar Opposite
J&K Bank, Patelnagar College
Road, Kathua.
Through: Ms. Chetna Manhas, Advocate vice
Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M A CHOWDHARY, JUDGE
ORDER
(07.02.2026)
1. Petitioners alleging that the respondent-Indus Tower Limited,
has installed a mobile tower operating the Airtel network in the
close vicinity of Shiva Nagar and Patel Nagar, falling under
Ward No. 16 (A/P Ward No. 19) and Ward No. 15, Kathua on
the building of the private respondent, namely Om Prakash
Sharma, without due regard to the safety, health, and
residential concerns of the inhabitants of the surrounding
locality has filed this writ petition.
2. It is alleged that against aforesaid action, the petitioners
submitted a representation 13.11.2025, to respondent No. 5-
Deputy Commissioner, Kathua, requesting that no mobile tower
be installed or made operational within their thickly populated
residential area that no inhabitant of the locality has ever
issued or signed any NOC/consent for the installation of the
mobile tower. Neither any authority or telecom operator has
approached or consulted the residents of the locality prior to
initiating the installation process.
3. The petitioners have sought follwoing reliefs:
" (i) Issue writ in the nature of Mandamus:
Direction the respondents to stop the
operation of mobile phone tower and
immediately remove the same from densely
populated residential area, as the same is
being run without necessary
permissions/NOCs and is in violation of
rules and guidelines.
(i) Issue Writ in the nature of Mandamus:
Directing the respondents to ensure full
compliance of the existing norms for the
installation of mobile towers to curb the
menance of rampant illegal towers
installation in the density populated
residential areas"
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
respondents have not filed their objections so far and further
submits that the petitioners would be satisfied if the present
petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 5-
Deputy Commissioner, Kathua, to look into their grievance and
take a decision with regard to the functioning of the Bharti
Airtel tower installed on the roof of the house of the private
respondent No. 7.
5. Learned counsel for official respondent No. 5, submits that
respondent No. 5 shall not be averse to any direction for
consideration, as pleaded by learned counsel for the petitioners.
6. In view of the pleadings, facts and circumstances of the case,
and the submissions made at the Bar, the present petition is
disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 5, Deputy
Commissioner, Kathua, to consider the plea raised by the
petitioners and decide the matter expeditiously in accordance
with the rules and regulations governing the subject.
7. The petitioners shall supply a copy of the present petition to
respondent No. 5 for compliance, along with a certified copy of
this order, within a period of two weeks.
8. Petition, is thus, disposed of, along with connected
application(s).
(M A CHOWDHARY)
JUDGE
Jammu
07.02.2026
Amit
