IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 10TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 19TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 16209 of 2009(U) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ NIRAVATH BUND ROAD RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION (NBRRA) REG NO. ER 415/05) REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT M.J. MICHEAL, KADAMAT NAGAR, NIRAVATH ROAD, MARADU P.O. BY ADVS. MR.DENIZEN KOMATH, MR.SHERRY J. THOMAS, SMT.RAGAM.S.MOHAN. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE MARADU GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. M/S. RELIANCE INFRATEL LTD, 38/6, A & P ARCADE, SA ROAD, KOCHI - 17. 3. K.K. JACOB, KURISINKAL BUILDING, NIRAVATH BUND ROAD, MARADU P.O. R1 BY ADV.MR.S.CHANDRASENAN R2 BY ADVS.MR.V.G.ARUN, MR.T.R.HARIKUMAR. R3 BY ADV. MR.K.C.ELDHO THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.16209/2009 U APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE ROUGH SKETCH OF THE BUILDING AND ROAD. P2: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 5/05/09 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P2(A): COPY OF THE RECEIPT GIVEN BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P3: COPY OF THE SECOND COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P3(A): COPY OF THE RECEIPT FOR SECOND COMPLAINT GIVEN BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P4: COPY OF THE MEMO ISSUED BY THE STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD. P5: COPY OF THE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS OF RIGHT TO INFORMATION REPLY GIVEN BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: R3(A): COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.4401 OF 2007 DTD. 01/10/2007 OF SRO, MARADU. R3(B): COPY OF THE TAX PAID RECEIPT NO.4732544 DTD. 27/11/2008 ISSUED BY VILLAGE OFFICER, MARADU. R3(C): COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT (RENEWAL) DTD. 28/11/2007 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT PANCHAYATH. R3(D): COPY OF THE BUILDING PLAN APPROVED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT PANACHAYATH. R3(E): COPY OF THE BUILDING TAX PAID RECEIPT NO.34 DTD. 25/05/2009 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT PANCHAYATH. /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.16209 of 2009-U = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 10th day of November, 2009. JUDGMENT The petitioner is an association of residents of a locality. They sought for a direction that the construction of a mobile telecommunication tower be stopped because, according to them, it is in violation of the relevant rules in the KMBR. No interim order was granted at the stage of admission. The construction has to be only in terms of the KMBR as permitted by the Panchayat. As of now, the construction has been completed. The question of allotting building number for the tower on presentment of the completion certificate will now arise. The petitioner, through Ext.P4 placed on record as an additional document, rightly points out that the PCB has notified the Panchayat that it shall not issue WPC16209/09 -: 2 :- licence until the PCB gives its consent to establish tower. The PCB's insistence in that regard is only in the issuance of the licence under the Kerala Panchayat Raj (Issue of Licence to Dangerous and Offensive Trades and Factories) Rules, 1996. The question whether the completion certificate is to be issued is a matter entirely within the jurisdiction of the Panchayat Secretary. If the petitioner has any grievance, subject to the question of locus standi, the petitioner would be eligible to challenge it before a statutory body because, statutory reliefs are provided for those who are aggrieved by the numbering of the building which will amount to a decision of the Secretary of the Panchayat. The operating of the tower, that too, with the support of a DI Set may or may not have to be with the PCB's concurrence. Different writ petitions are pending on such issues. Therefore, I do not deem it appropriate to conclude parties herein on that issue, as of now. Hence, without prejudice to the petitioner, subject to WPC16209/09 -: 3 :- maintainability and locus standi, seeking relief before the appropriate statutory body as regards any decision that the Panchayat may take regarding the numbering of the building and without prejudice to the petitioner putting the tower to use with appropriate licences and certificates in accordance with law, this writ petition is ordered directing that the Panchayat would consider the matter and issue decision in accordance with law, both regarding the number of the building, as also, regarding the issuance of D & O licence. It is clarified that the allotment of the building number relates only to the room which should hold the DI set and any other additional construction for the purpose of that tower and not the building which is already in existence over which the new structures are coming up. THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/2411