Shynas vs The Telecom Authority Malappuram
2024 Latest Caselaw 30528 Ker

Kerala High Court

Shynas vs The Telecom Authority Malappuram on 25 October, 2024

Author: V.G.Arun

Bench: V.G.Arun

                                                        2024:KER:79668


                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

                   THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

     FRIDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2024 / 3RD KARTHIKA, 1946

                        WP(C) NO. 37239 OF 2024

PETITIONER/S:

          SHYNAS
          AGED 38 YEARS
          S/O ABOOBACKER, AMMUTTINTE PURAKKAL, PURATHUR, TIRUR
          TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676502.


          BY ADVS.
          JAMSHEED HAFIZ
          T.S.SREEKUTTY
          FATHIMA NASREEN S.


RESPONDENT/S:

    1     THE TELECOM AUTHORITY MALAPPURAM
          REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE,
          UPHILL MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676505.

    2     THE PURATHUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT
          PURATHUR (PO), MALAPPUARM DISTRICT. REPRESENTED BY ITS
          SECRETARY, PIN - 676102.

    3     M/S ASSENT TELECOM INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD,
          REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, SANGEETA TOWERS #3, 80 FEET
          ROAD, INDIRANAGAR, BANGALORE, PIN - 560038.

          SMT. DEEPA NARAYANAN, SR. GP.
          SRI. MANOJ RAMASWAMY, SC FOR R2.


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.10.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                                          2024:KER:79668
WP(C) NO. 37239 OF 2024             2




                               JUDGMENT

Aggrieved by the proposal to install a

telecommunication tower in his locality, the petitioner has

approached the 1st respondent with Ext.P1 representation.

According to the petitioner, the proposed telecommunication

tower is within prohibited distance of the High Tide Line.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that her

client will be satisfied with a direction to the 1 st respondent to

consider Ext.P1 expeditiously.

3. I heard the Standing Counsel for the 2 nd respondent

and the learned Government Pleader.

4. In view of the limited relief being granted, notice to

the 3rd respondent is dispensed with.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing

the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P1 and take appropriate 2024:KER:79668

decision thereon, after affording an opportunity of hearing to

the petitioner and the 3rd respondent.

Sd/-

V.G.ARUN JUDGE Sru 2024:KER:79668

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 37239/2024

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 08.10.2024.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT DATED 09.10.2024 OF THE REPRESENTATION SEND BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL