IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE TUESDAY, THE 26TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 7TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 34285 of 2007(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ M/S. TVS INTERCONNECT SYSTEMS LTD., 'MEENA MADHAVAM', OPP. BHAVANS VIDYA MANDIR, DESHABHIMANI ROAD, ELAMAKKARA (P.O),ERNAKULAM-26, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROJECT MANAGER, SRI.SREEJITH G.PILLAI. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW SRI.SATHISH NINAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE MADAKKATHARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, KURICHIKKARA P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE MADAKKATHARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT COMMITTEE, MADAKKATHARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT OFFICE, KURICHIKKARA P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT,REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT. *ADDL.R3.PARENT TEACHERS ASSOCIATION, UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL, THANNIKULAM, P.O.KURICHIKKARA, THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT V.S.SATHYASEELAN. *ADDL.R3 IS IMPLEADED AS PER THE ORDER DT. 19.12.2007 IN I.A. NO.16624 OF 2007. R1-R2 BY ADV. SRI.SARVOTHAMAN R3 BY ADV.SRI.P.V.CHANDRA MOHAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.34285 of 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated: 26th February, 2008 JUDGMENT Under challenge is Ext.P3 order issued by the Panchayat by which the petitioner-mobile telephone company is directed to shift the tower installed by them on two grounds. The first ground is that after installation of the tower, completion certificate has not been submitted by the petitioner. The second ground is that while constructing the tower the KMBR has been violated by the petitioner. Through the counter affidavit filed to the Writ Petition the Panchayat has also contended that the construction of the tower was in deviation from the plan which had been submitted by the petitioner. 2. Heard Mr.Santhosh Mathew, counsel for the petitioner, Mr.K.P.Sarvothaman, counsel for the Panchayat and Mr.P.V.Chandramohan, counsel for the additional third respondent. 3. Mr.Santhosh Mathew would submit that Ext.P3 order of the Panchayat is not preceded by a hearing of the petitioner and on that score alone Ext.P3 is liable to be quashed. According to him, the petitioner will be able to convince the Panchayat in a prospective hearing that both the grounds mentioned in Ext.P3 as well through the counter affidavit no longer survives. Learned counsel requested W.P.C.No.34285/07 - 2 - that the Panchayat be directed to conduct a hearing and take a fresh decision. 4. Mr.K.P.Sarvothaman, counsel for the Panchayat and Mr.P.V.Chandramohan, counsel for the additional third respondent does not have any serious objection in the Panchayat being directed to reconsider the matter. They submit that the petitioner who unauthorisedly constructed the tower should not be allowed to operate the tower pending decision by the Panchayat. 5. I do find some merit in the submissions of the counsel for the Panchayat and the additional third respondent. Neverthless I am not inclined to disturb the status quo which obtains as on date as regards the operation of the tower lest the customers of the petitioner- company who are not parties to this Writ Petition should suffer. I quash Ext.P3 and direct the Panchayat to take a fresh decision in the matter after hearing the petitioner and the additional third respondent. Decision as directed above will be taken at the earliest and at any rate within three weeks of the petitioner producing copy of this judgment. The petitioner is reminded that the present operation of the tower will be subject to the decision to be taken by the Panchayat as directed above. It is open to the petitioner to convince W.P.C.No.34285/07 - 3 - the Panchayat during the hearing that the grounds on which the Panchayat is insisting on the demolition of the tower/shifting of the tower do not any longer survive. It is open to the third respondent also to substantiate the contentions raised by him in this court through the counter affidavit dated 3.1.2008 during that hearing. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. srd PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE