Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 10924 Ker
Judgement Date : 7 April, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF APRIL 2021 / 17TH CHAITHRA,
1943
WP(C).No.5684 OF 2021(I)
PETITIONER :
INDUS TOWERS LIMITED
8TH FLOOR,
VANKARATH TOWER, PALARIVATTOM-682024.
(REPRESENTED BY ITS HEAD-LEGAL -MR. RAJKUMAR
PAVOTHIL, S/O P NARENDRAN, AGED 41 YEARS,
RESIDING AT MIDHILA, THAMARAKULANGARA,
THRIPUNITHURA)
BY ADV. SHRI.P.DEEPAK
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE DISTRICT TELECOM COMMITTEE
THIRUVANANTHAPRUAM, REPRESENTED BY ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND DEPUTY COLLECTOR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-675043.
2 SUJI A.S., AGED 38 YEARS, S/O SIVAPALAN,
KUNNUVILA VEEDU, OOLANKUZHI ANAYARA,
KADAKKAMPILLY VILLAGE,
(SECRETARY, ANAYARA KIZHAKKETHIL
SREEBHAGAVATHI TEMPLE TRUST)
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695029.
3 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
PETTAH POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-
695024.
4 THIRUVANANTHAPURAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
VIKAS BHAVAN P.O., KERALA-695033.
-2-
WP(C).No.5684 OF 2021(I)
*ADDL. R5 PRADEEP
HOUSE DEEPAM, KIZHAKKATHIL JN, ANAYARA P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 029
*ADDL. R6 SATHEESAN
ASHRAMAN FINANCE, LORDS JN, ANAYARA P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 029.
ADDL.R5 AND R6 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER
DATED 08-03-2021 IN IA 1/2021
*ADDL. R7 THE DISTRICT FIRE OFFICER,
DISTRICT FIRE OFFICE, FIRE AND RESCUE
SERVICE, FIRE FORCE JUNCTION, PULIMOODU P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001
Email:[email protected], is
IS IMPLEADED AS ADDL.R7 AS PER ORDER DATED
23-03-21 IN IA 2/21.
R1, R3 & R7 BY SRI.SUNIL NATH, GOVT.PLEADER
R2 BY ADV. SRI.G.P.SHINOD
R2 BY ADV. SRI.GOVIND PADMANAABHAN
R2 BY ADV. SHRI.AJIT G ANJARLEKAR
R4 BY ADV. SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON (SR.)
R4 BY ADV. SRI.P.K.MANOJKUMAR
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 07.04.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
WP(C).No.5684 OF 2021(I)
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, which is a company offering passive
infrastructure services to telecom operators and other wireless
service providers, has filed this writ petition under Article 226
of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to
quash Ext.P8 order dated 24.02.2021 issued by the 1 st
respondent District Telecom Committee. The petitioner has
also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding the 3 rd
respondent Station House Officer to afford adequate and
effective protection to the petitioner to proceed with the
construction of the telecommunication tower on the strength
of Ext.P1 building permit dated 02.11.2019 issued by the 4 th
respondent Corporation and in consonance with Ext.P7 written
undertaking dated 25.02.2021 without any let, hindrance or
obstruction from any quarter.
2. On 04.03.2021, when this writ petition came up for
admission, the petitioner was directed to file an application to
implead the objectors before the 1 st respondent, as seen from
Ext.P8 order.
3. On 08.03.2021, this Court allowed I.A.No.1 of
WP(C).No.5684 OF 2021(I)
2021, whereby additional respondents 5 and 6 were
impleaded. The learned Government Pleader took notice on
admission for respondents 1 and 3. The learned Standing
Counsel took notice on admission for the 4 th respondent. This
Court issued urgent notice on admission by special messenger
to the 2nd respondent and additional respondents 5 and 6,
returnable by 15.03.2021.
4. On 23.03.2021, this Court allowed I.A.No.2 of 2021
filed by the petitioner seeking an order to implead the District
Fire Officer, Fire and Rescue Services, Thiruvananthapuram as
the additional 7th respondent.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the
learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1, 3
and additional 7th respondent, the learned counsel for the 2 nd
respondent and also the learned Standing Counsel for the 4 th
respondent Corporation. Despite service of notice, none
appears for additional respondents 5 and 6.
6. During the course of arguments, the learned
counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner
intents to use Valve Regulated Lead Acid Batteries, instead of
WP(C).No.5684 OF 2021(I)
KSEB power supply or diesel generator for the
telecommunication tower proposed to be constructed on the
strength of Ext.P1 building permit. The petitioner shall submit
a proper request before the 1st respondent for reconsideration
of the matter, which may be directed to be considered by the
1st respondent expeditiously.
7. The learned counsel for the 2nd respondent would
submit that reconsideration of the matter by the 1st
respondent District Telecom Committee may be with notice to
the 2nd respondent and other objectors and after taking note
of the legal contention of the 2nd respondent that construction
of mobile telecommunication tower cannot be permitted in a
residential zone.
8. The learned Government Pleader would submit that
in case a proper request is made by the petitioner for
reconsideration of the matter, as submitted by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the 1st respondent District Telecom
Committee shall consider that request with notice to both
sides.
Having considered the submissions made by the learned
WP(C).No.5684 OF 2021(I)
counsel on both sides, this writ petition is disposed of by
setting aside Ext.P8 order dated 24.02.2021 of the 1 st
respondent District Telecom Committee, so as to enable the
said Committee to reconsider the matter based on the request
that has to be made by the petitioner, within a period of two
weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this
judgment, to proceed with the construction of the
telecommunication tower on the strength of Ext.P1 building
permit by using Valve Regulated Lead Acid Batteries for power
supply, instead of diesel generators or power supply from the
Kerala State Electricity Board. The 1st respondent District
Telecom Committee shall consider that request and take an
appropriate decision, after considering its technical feasibility
and other relevant aspects, with notice to the petitioner, the
2nd respondent, additional respondents 5 and 6 and other
objectors, if any, and also the additional 7 th respondent
District Fire Officer, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate,
within a period of one month from the date of receipt of such
request. While taking such a decision, the 1 st respondent shall
advert to the legal contention raised by the 2 nd respondent
WP(C).No.5684 OF 2021(I)
that the construction of mobile telecommunication tower
cannot be permitted in a residential zone.
Sd/-
ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE AV/8/4
WP(C).No.5684 OF 2021(I)
APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT DATED 02.11.2019 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LOCATION PLAN IN SY.NO. 1700/1-1-1 & 1700/2-2 KADAKAMPILLY VILLAGE.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 04.08.2020 FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN WPC 16043 OF 2020.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 11.11.2020 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WPC 16043 OF 2020.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 16.01.2021.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN UNDERTAKING SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 25/02/2021.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 24.02.2021.
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!