IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 25TH JANUARY 2010 / 5TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 2388 of 2010(W) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. R.SURENDRAN PILLAI,S/O.RAGHAVAN PILLAI AGED 65 YEARS, SECRETARY, ACTION COUNCIL AGAINST THE INSTALLATION OF BSNL MOBILE TOWER IN EDAKULANGARA, IN THODIYOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH RESIDING AT KOTHERIL, EDAKULANGARA PO KARUNAGAPPALLY. 2. B.SATHYAPALA PANICKER, S/O.BHASKARA PANICKER, PRIYALAM, EDAKULANGARA PO KARUNAGAPPALLY. BY ADV. SRI.T.GOPALAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THODIYOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THODIYOOR PO, KARUNAGAPALLY 690 568, 2. THODIYOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH COMMITTEE REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT THODIYOOR PO, KARUNAGAPALLY 690 568, 3. THE ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, NELLIMUKKU, KOLLAM. 4. INDIA TELECOM INFRA LTD, 2ND FLOOR CHAKKACHERRY TOWER, SEAPORT AIRPORT ROAD, KAKKANAD, COCHIN. 5. THE AREA MANAGER, CELL ONE BSNL, RAMANKULANGARA PO, KOLLAM. 6. L.MAYADEVI, W/O.MOHAN KUMAR KOTHERIL, EDAKULANGARA PO, KARUNAGAPPALLY 690 562. BY SC SRI.C.S.RAMANATHAN SC FOR PCB THULASI BAI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------ WP(C) No. 2388 of 2010 -------------------------- Dated, this the 25th day of January, 2010 JUDGMENT 1. The complaint of the petitioner is against the permit that was granted by the 1st respondent Panchayat enabling the 4th respondent to install a telecommunication tower. 2. Admittedly, a building permit has been issued to the 4th respondent. But referring to Ext.P8 Circular, the learned counsel submits that even during the course of installation, if a complaint was received, the Secretary is bound to inspect the place and redress the grievances. It is stated that aggrieved by the aforesaid permit granted as per Ext.P8 Circular, petitioner and other residents filed Ext.P1 before the 1st respondent and that no action is taken on Ext.P1. 3. Having regard to the above, I dispose of this writ petition directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P1, with notice to the 4th respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three weeks of W.P.(C).2388/2010 2 production of a copy of this judgment along with the copy of the writ petition. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs