IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 22ND MAY 2009 / 1ST JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 11623 of 2009(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- BRUSHNAVE, S/O.MOHANDAS, MELAPOKKATHUVELI, VARANAD POST, THANNIRMUKKAM, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.V.SURESH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF HEALTH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA. 4. THE SECRETARY, THANNEERMUKKAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, CHERTHALA, ALAPUZHA DISTRICT. 5. THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. SREEJITH, M/S.BHARATHI INFRASTRUCTURE LTD KUNDANOOR, MARADU P.O., KOCHI - 04. 7. M/S.WIRELESS-T T INFO SERVICES LTD. SL PLAZA, PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI. BY GP SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH SC SRI.M.K.CHANDRAMOHANDAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).11623/2009 -------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of May, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner has raised a grievance regarding the construction of mobile towers near to his residence. According to him, such mobile towers caused health hazards to the persons residing to the vicinity of such towers. He has brought this to the notice of the District Collector as also the Revenue Divisional Officer. He has also approached the fourth respondent, Panchayat, requiring them to revoke the licence already granted by them for construction of a mobile tower. 2. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader, I am of the view, that the grievance highlighted by the petitioner in Ext.P6 should be looked into by the RDO, the third respondent. Similarly the fourth respondent Panchayat should consider Ext.P7 and conduct an enquiry. If the allegations are found to be correct and there are sufficient materials to W.P.(C).11623/2009 2 substantiate the same, Panchayat shall proceed to take action after notice to the licensee. 3. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the third respondent to look into Ext.P6 and take appropriate action after notice to the licensee as well. This shall be done within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. 4. Similarly fourth respondent, Panchayat, shall look into Ext.P7. If, on enquiry, allegations are found to be substantiated, Panchayat shall proceed to take action after notice to the licensee. Copy of the writ petition shall be produced by the petitioner along with separate copies of the judgment before respondents 3 and 4. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs