Kerala High Court
Karthikeyan.P vs State Of Kerala on 13 January, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022/23RD POUSHA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 1087 OF 2022
PETITIONERS:
1 KARTHIKEYAN P., S/O.PADMANABHAN,
KDAKKOTTU, KADATHUR, THAZHAVA,
KOLLAM.
2 RAJASRI M., W/O. REGHUNATHAN,
KAIPPALLIL (VRINDAVANAM),
KADATHUR, THAZHAVA, KOLLAM.
3 T.KARTHIKA, W/O.RAJU, KAIPPALLIL,
KADATHUR, THAZHAVA, KOLLAM.
4 PRAMEELA, W/O. ANIL KUMAR,
KAIPPALLIL PADEETTATHIL,
KADATHUR, THAZHAVA, KOLLAM.
5 SARALA, W/O. NADARAJAN, SREEVIHAR,
KADATHUR, THAZHAVA, KOLLAM.
6 SHYJU K., S/O. N.KARTHIKEYAN,
VILAYILAZHIKATHU, KADATHUR,
THAZHAVA, KOLLAM.
7 ANJANA, W/O. B.MURALEEDHARAN,
THARAVEETTIL HOUSE, KADATHUR,
THAZHAVA, KOLLAM.
8 SOBHA, W/O.SUSHANTHAN, GOKULAM,
KADATHUR, THAZHAVA, KOLLAM.
BY ADVS.
B.S.SWATHI KUMAR
ANITHA RAVINDRAN
HARISANKAR N UNNI
SARANGADHARAN P.
NAVVYA UNNI
WP(C)No.1087/2022
2
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENT,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2 STATE TELECOM COMMITTEE,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
3 DISTRICT TELECOM COMMITTEE,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN/
DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION,
KOLLAM-691 013.
4 THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE/
DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM-691 013.
5 THE ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER,
KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD,
BIG BAZAR, KOLLAM-691 011.
6 THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER,
KOLLAM-691 001.
7 THAZHAVA GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
THAZHAVA, KOLLAM-690 539,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
8 THE MANAGER,
RELIANCE JIO-INFO COMM LIMITED/
TELECOM SERVICE PROVIDER, 32/2552-C,
2ND FLOOR, PUKKALAATTU KARIYATTU TOWER,
MAMANGALAM, KOCHI-682 025.
SRI.APPU P.S., G.P.
SRI.T.NAVEEN, SC FOR PCB
SRI.SIJU KAMALASANAN, SC -R7
WP(C)No.1087/2022
3
SRI.G.HARIKUMAR, SC - R8
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 13.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C)No.1087/2022
4
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 13th day of January, 2022
The petitioners, who are residents of Ward No.XXI of
Kadathoor Ward, Oachira Block of the Thazhava Grama
Panchayat in Kollam District, are aggrieved by the proposed
construction of Telecommunication Tower in a thickly
populated area.
2. The petitioners submit that the proposed area
where the Telecommunication Tower is coming, is an area
where there are Anganwadi, Panchayat Library, K.K.P.M.
L.P. School, Post Office, Mosque, Plavanoor Devi Temple,
Kalari Devi Temple, Sree Narayana Guru Mandiram and
other institutions. There are Fish Farms, Cattle Farms,
Poultry Farm, a Primary Health Centre, a Hospital and two
Milk Societies also in this area. This area is not suitable for
construction of Telecommunication Tower. The proposed
WP(C)No.1087/2022
construction is against the prevailing guidelines in respect
of construction of mobile towers. Therefore, this Court
should declare that under no circumstances mobile tower
be allowed in the midst of residential-cum-educational area
and that the proposed erection of the mobile tower is
against the mandate that only after a scientific study of the
locality can a project be sanctioned and therefore the
proposed mobile tower should not be allowed to be erected.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the
petitioners, the learned Government Pleader representing
respondents 1, 4 and 6, the learned Standing Counsel for
the Kerala State Pollution Control Board, the learned
Standing Counsel for the 7th respondent and the learned
Standing Counsel representing the 8th respondent.
4. The learned Government Pleader and the
learned Standing Counsel representing the respondents
controverted all the material allegations made in the writ
WP(C)No.1087/2022
petition.
5. The petitioners have raised their grievances
before the District Collector who is the Chairman of the
District Telecom Committee. In Ext.P1 representation, the
petitioners have highlighted their grievances in respect of
the proposed mobile tower. Therefore, it will be only just
and proper that the 3rd respondent may consider Ext.P1
representation filed by the petitioners expeditiously.
In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of
directing the 3rd respondent to consider Ext.P1
representation submitted by the petitioners before finalising
the matter.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH
JUDGE
ncd/15.01.2022
WP(C)No.1087/2022
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1087/2022
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED
BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED
1.1.2022
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED
BEFORE THE 7TH RESPONDENT DATED
1.1.2022
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH
COMMENCEMENT OF THE BASEMENT FOR
PUTTING UP OF THE TOWER
