Madras High Court
M/S.Ascend Telecom Infrastructure ... vs The Superintendent Of Police on 1 April, 2025
Author: G.K.Ilanthiraiyan
Bench: G.K. Ilanthiraiyan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 01-04-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN
W.P. NO. 11450 of 2025
and WMP.No.12930 of 2025
M/s.Ascend Telecom Infrastructure Private Limited
Rep By Its Authorized Signatory,
Tamilselvan .. Petitioner
Vs
1.The Superintendent of Police,
Tiruvannamalai.
2. The Inspector of Police,
Polur Police Station.
3.The District Collector,
District Collector Office,
Tiruvannamalai. .. Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to
provide adequate police protection to the petitioner company and its staff and
subordinates to erect, commissioning of equipments and to radiate the
transmission tower at the lease site admeasuring an extent of about 750 sq.ft.
of vacant land located at Thiruvannamalai District, Thiruvannamalai
Registration District, Polur SRO, Allinagar Village at No.87, comprised in
S.No.109/B1A as per patta No.695 New S.No.190/24, Subhanathar Street.
Page 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/04/2025 04:16:27 pm )
For Petitioner : Mr.A.M.Venkata Krishnan
For Respondent : Mr.A.Gopinath
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed for direction directing the respondents
to provide adequate police protection to the petitioner company and its staff and
subordinates to erect, commissioning of equipment and to radiate the
transmission tower at the lease site admeasuring an extent of 750 sq.ft. of
vacant land at Thiruvannamalai District, Thiruvannamalai Registration District,
Polur SRO, Allinagar Village at No.87, comprised in S.No.109/B1A as per
patta No.695 New S.No.190/24, Subhanathar Street.
2. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials
available on record.
3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is a licensed telecom
service incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 providing telecom
services. For the said purpose, mobile phone towers are going to be erected.
The petitioner had also entered into a lease agreement with the individual
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/04/2025 04:16:27 pm )
owners for the purpose of erecting mobile phone towers for effective
communication. Already, the Government of Tamil Nadu has granted
exemption to all the Telecom companies to install and erect the cell phone
towers by virtue of Government Order passed in G.O.Ms.No.302, dated
12.12.2002 Housing and Urban Department and G.O.Ms.No.177 dated
17.12.2002 Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department and
Circular Letter No.5742/C3/2008 dated 26.03.2009 issued by the Secretary to
the Government of Tamil Nadu, Engineering Department.
4. When the petitioner attempted to erect the mobile phone tower, the
residents of the area came to the spot and started causing hindrance to the
company officials from carrying out the construction work. The petitioner also
gave a representation to the respondent Police to provide them with protection.
However, the respondent Police had not acted upon the said complaint and
therefore, the present Writ Petition has been filed.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the
issue involved in this Writ 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/04/2025 04:16:27 pm )
was a party.
6. 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
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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/04/2025 04:16:27 pm )
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.
5.With the above directions, this Criminal
Original Petition is disposed of.”
7. 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.
8. For the reasons stated above, there shall be a direction to the
respondent police to provide police protection to the petitioner for erection of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/04/2025 04:16:27 pm )
the cell phone tower. The respondent police shall ensure that the entire process
goes on in a smooth manner, without giving raise to any law and order problem.
9. In view of the above, this Writ Petition petition is disposed of.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.
01.04.2025
(3/3)
Index : Yes/No
Neutral citation : Yes/No
Speaking/non-speaking order
drl
To
1.The Superintendent of Police,
Tiruvannamalai.
2. The Inspector of Police,
Polur Police Station.
3.The District Collector,
District Collector Office,
Tiruvannamalai.
4. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/04/2025 04:16:27 pm )
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
drl
W.P. NO. 11450 of 2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/04/2025 04:16:27 pm )
01.04.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/04/2025 04:16:27 pm )
