Madras High Court
Sarojini vs The District Collector on 5 February, 2025
Author: D.Bharatha Chakravarthy
Bench: D.Bharatha Chakravarthy
2025:MHC:367
W.P.No. 3836 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 05.02.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
W.P.No. 3836 of 2025
and W.M.P.Nos.4247 & 4248 of 2025
SAROJINI ... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
COIMBATORE DISTRICT,
COIMBATORE.
2. KRISHNAN
3. JOTHI
4. THE MANAGER
AIRTEL TOWER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,
NO.112 B, CHERAN NAGAR,
JANSON INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ROAD,
KARUMATHAMPATTY,
COIMBATORE - 641 659. ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the
issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to forbear the
fourth respondent from erecting a huge cell phone tower in the on southern
side of the residential plot in D.No. X 281, North Housing unit, Selvapuram,
Coimbatore- 641026 by considering the petitioner's representation dated
16.12.2024.
Page No.1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No. 3836 of 2025
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Venkatesh
For R1 : Mr.K.Suresh
Government Advocate
ORDER
This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus directing the first
respondent to forbear the fourth respondents from erecting a huge cell phone
tower on the southern side of the residential plot in D.No. X 281, North
Housing Unit, Selvapuram, Coimbatore - 641 026.
2. It is the contention of the petitioner that the cell phone tower is
hazardous to the health and there is even Anganwadi and small children who
will be affected. It is his further contention that the second and third
respondents are the landlords, who have given permission for the installation
of the cell phone tower.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3. If the second and third respondents are the owners of the premises
and they have given their premises for erection of the cell phone tower, then
this Court cannot interfere with the erection of the cell phone tower. It has
already been held in the following judgments that there is no scientific
evidence to suggest that the cell phone tower affects the health in any manner
whatsoever:-
1. Indus Towers Ltd. v. Grampanchayat, 2023 SCC
OnLine Bom 1472 [Bombay HC – 2J]
2. Biju K. Balan v. State of Maharashtra, 2019 SCC
OnLine Bom 97 [Bombay HC – 2J]
3. G. Sathyanarayana Moorthy v. Union of India,
2016 SCC OnLine Mad 20769 [Madras HC – 1J]
4. Therefore, the contentions made by the petitioner on this core issue
are without any merits. The only other contention made is that the cell phone
tower is now sought to be erected in a Government Poramboku land. The
second and third respondents can enter into an agreement with the fourth
respondent to erect the tower, if only the place belongs to them. Therefore, to
the limited extent, the first respondent may direct the local surveyor and the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Village Administrative Officer to check whether the tower is being installed
on Government Poramboku land and ensure that it is not installed on such
land without the necessary permission.
5. With the above observation, this writ petition is disposed of. No
costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
05.02.2025
Neutral Citation: Yes
nsl
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
nsl
To
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
COIMBATORE DISTRICT,
COIMBATORE.
05.02.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
