Jans Raj vs The District Telecom Committee
2021 Latest Caselaw 17408 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
     WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 3RD BHADRA, 1943
                        WP(C) NO. 15688 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

          JANS RAJ
          AGED 35 YEARS, S/O RAJU VARGHESE,
          PAZHAVILA SANKARATHIL, KAVUMPAD, NOORANAD P.O.,
          MAVELIKARA - 690 504

          BY ADVS.
          RINNY STEPHEN CHAMAPARAMPIL
          ASHA ELIZABETH MATHEW

RESPONDENTS:

    1     THE DISTRICT TELECOM COMMITTEE
          ALAPPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN (DISTRICT
          COLLECTOR), COLLECTORATE, ALAPPUZHA - 688 001

    2     THE PALAMEL GRAMA PANCHAYAT
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, NOORANAD P.O.,
          MAVELIKKARA 690 571

    3     THE SECRETARY
          PALAMEL GRAMA PANCHAYAT, NOORANAD P.O.,
          MAVELIKKARA 690 571

    4     M/S.ATC TELECOM INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SENIOR MANAGER (LEGAL),
          ATC HOUSE, 65/1826-2B, CHERAMANGALATH, SHENOY ROAD,
          KALOOR P.O., ERNAKULAM - 682 017

          BY ADVS.
          MANU ROY
          SANTHOSH MATHEW
          ARUN THOMAS
          JENNIS STEPHEN
          KARTHIKA MARIA
          ANIL SEBASTIAN PULICKEL
          JAISY ELZA JOE

          ADV.SURYA BINOY.B, SR. G.P.
          ADV.MANU ROY, SC, PANCHAYAT
          ADV.ARUN THOMAS, FOR R4

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.08.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 15688 OF 2021

                                         2




                                 JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayers:

"(i) Issue a writ of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 1st respondent to consider Exhibit P2 representation and after to take a decision thereon affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner expeditiously within a specific timeframe to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 3rd respondent to consider Exhibit P4 representation and to take a decision thereon after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner expeditiously within a specific timeframe to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court before taking a decision on the permit application of the 4th respondent to establish a Telecommunications Tower in the land comprised in Resurvey Block No.21 of Palamel Village."

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned

Government Pleader, the learned standing counsel appearing for

respondents 2 and 3 as well as Adv.Arun Thomas, the learned counsel

appearing for the 4th respondent.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the 4 th

respondent is attempting to establish a Telecommunication Tower in the

property adjacent to the petitioner's property. It is submitted that Ext.P2 WP(C) NO. 15688 OF 2021

complaint had been preferred by the petitioner and other residents of

the locality before the Chairman of the 1 st respondent, who is the District

Collector, and the petitioner seeks a consideration thereof, before any

steps are taken to issue the Building permit to the 4 th respondent.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent submits that

the application for Building permit had been submitted by the 4 th

respondent as early as on 27.11.2020 and that a direction had been issued

by this Court in W.P.(C).No.6518/2021 on 08.07.2021 directing a

consideration of the application. It is submitted that in spite of the

directions, no orders have been passed on the application for the

Building permit and that the issue is liable to be considered by the

Panchayat in accordance with law. It is contented that the petitioner

would have a right to object to the location of the Telecommunication

Tower before the 1st respondent even after the issuance of the Building

permit and that no prejudice, whatsoever will be caused to the petitioner

by the consideration of the application for Building permit by the

Panchayat.

5. The learned standing counsel appearing for the Panchayat submits

that the application for permit submitted by the 4 th respondent has not WP(C) NO. 15688 OF 2021

been considered by the Panchayat due to the filing of this writ petition.

6. Having heard the learned counsel on all sides, I am of the opinion

that since the application for Building permit had been submitted by the

4th respondent and there was also a direction by this Court to consider

the same, the issue requires a consideration at the hands of the

Panchayat in the first instance. There will, accordingly, be a direction to

the respondents to consider the objections raised by the petitioner and

other residents of the locality in Ext.P4 representation while considering

the application for Building permit submitted by the 4 th respondent.

Once orders are passed on the application, the right of the petitioner to

approach the 1st respondent, if aggrieved, shall remain unaffected. It is

made clear that I have not gone into the merits of the matter, nor

expressed any views on the same.

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE NP WP(C) NO. 15688 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15688/2021

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 10.01.2018 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FROM THE PALAMEL VILLAGE OFFICE

Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 19.12.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER AND OTHER NEARBY RESIDENTS BEFORE THE CHAIRMAN OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT

Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT FORWARDING EXHIBIT P2 REPRESENTATION

Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION/COMPLAINT DATED 22.12.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER AND OTHER NEARBY RESIDENTS BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL