Indus Towers Limited vs The District Collector
2023 Latest Caselaw 7915 Mad

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 7915 Mad
Judgement Date : 10 July, 2023

Madras High Court

Indus Towers Limited vs The District Collector on 10 July, 2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 10.07.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH

W.P.No.20086 of 2023

Indus Towers Limited,
Rep by its Authorized Signatory Mr.S.Prasanna,
No.5, ESPEE IT Park, 5th Floor Hawaharlal Nehru Road,
Ekkatuthangal, Chennai - 600 097. ... Petitioner

Vs.

1. The District Collector,
State Bank Road,
Gopalapuram, Coimbatore,
Tamil Nadu 641 018.

2. Superintendent of Police (Rural)Office,
State Bank Road, Gopalapuram,
Coimbatore,
Tamil Nadu 641 018.

3. The Inspector of Police,
Kullakkapalayam,
Pollachi North, Pollachi.

4. The Inspector of Police,
Kavundamapalayam,
Thudiyalur,
Coimbatore North, Coimbatore.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2

5. The Inspector of Police,
Kurudampalayam, Thudiyalur,
Coimbatore North, Coimbatore.

6. The Inspector of Police,
Kondampatti, Kinathukadavu,
Coimbatore. ... Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondent
Nos.2 to 6 to provide necessary, effective Police Protection to the
petitioner for installing the Cell phone towers falling within the
District administration of Coimbatore and within the Jurisdiction of
the 2nd respondent and prevent any hindrances and obstacles from
any third parties, groups, mobs.

For Petitioner : Mr.P.J.Rishikesh

For Respondents : Mr.A.Damodaran
Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER

This Writ petition has been filed for a direction to the

respondents to provide police protection to erect transmission Cell

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Phone Tower and to install all the telecommunication electrical &

electronic equipments, OFC cable and its maintenance work on the

said BTS transmission Tower at District Administration at

Coimbatore, the petitioner undertakes to pay necessary charges.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is

engaged in the business of providing broadband Internet services and

other allied services throughout India. For the said purpose, cell

phone towers are going to be erected. The petitioner had also

entered into a lease agreement with the owner of the property and

had taken steps to install the cell phone tower. Already, the

Government of Tamil Nadu has granted exemption to all the Telecom

companies to install the cell phone towers by virtue of Government

Order passed in G.O.Ms.No.2, dated 01.04.2002.

3.When the petitioner attempted to erect the cell phone

tower, the residents of the area came to the spot and started

causing hindrance to the company officials from carrying out the

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

construction work. The petitioner also gave a representation dated

25.05.2023 to the 4th respondent to provide them with protection.

However, the 4th respondent Police had not acted upon the said

complaint and therefore, the present writ Petition has been filed.

4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would

submit that the issue involved in this petition is covered by the

earlier Judgments of this Court. The learned counsel brought to the

notice of this Court the order passed by this Court in

Crl.O.P.No.16618 of 2018, wherein the very same petitioner was a

party.

5.It will be appropriate to extract the relevant portions of the

order in Crl.O.P.No.16618 of 2018, which is extracted hereunder:-

“2.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner's company had the contract agreement for installation of cell phone tower with M/s.Indus Towers Limited, a company registered under the provisions of Indian Companies Act, 1956. It is further

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that whenever the petitioner's company attempted to erect transmission cell phone tower, publics are causing interference. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that by order dated 05.03.2015, the Honourable First Bench of this Court, in W.P.Nos.24976 of 2008 and etc., batch, held that because of the advancement in the science, no one has prevented to erect cell phone towers. It is also submitted that the petitioner has given a complaint dated 24.02.2016 to the first respondent police seeking police protection, for which C.S.R.No.42 of 2016 and since the same has not been considered so far, he has come up with the present petition for the relief stated supra.

3.Heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.

4.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is directed to send a fresh representation to the respondent and on receipt of the same, the respondent is directed to consider the representation to be submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

5.With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.”

6.This Court has consistently taken the view that no one can be

prevented from erecting the cell phone towers on a mere

apprehension about the effect of radiation from the cell phone

tower. The apprehension does not have a scientific backing. Till a

positive finding is given in this regard, cell phone towers cannot be

prevented to be installed on mere apprehensions.

7.For the reasons stated above, there shall be a direction to

the 4th respondent police to provide police protection to the

petitioner for erection of the cell phone tower. The 4th respondent

police shall ensure that the entire process goes on in a smooth