IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 3RD JUNE 2011 / 13TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 8981 of 2011(W) --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- INDIA TELECOM INFRA LTD.NO.42/1327 (1),2ND FLOOR, V.S.ARCADE, POWER HOUSE ROAD,OPP:POWER HOUSE, KACHERIPADI, COCHIN-682 018, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED PERSON BOBY SEBASTIAN, CIRCLE HEAD. BY ADV. SRI.P.SATHISAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 001. 2. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, VIYYOOR POLICE STATION, THRISSUR-680 001. 3. DEVASSY, S/O.PORINJU, ALAPPADAN, TIRUR EAST BAZAR POST, MULAKUNNATHUKAVU-680 581. 4. GEORGE, S/O.LAZAR,LEELAN KAVIL VEEDU, TIRUR EAST BAZAR POST, MULAKUNNATHUKAVU-680 581. 5. MULAMKUNNATHUKAVU GRAMA PANCHAYATH REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, KILLANNOOR VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 001. * ADDL. R6 IMPLEADED 6. P.D.JOSEPH,AGED 59 YEARS, EDITOR,”ZEEZAR NEWS” PANAGHADAN HOUSE, TIRUR, MULANKUNNATHUKAVU, THRISSUR - 680 531. * IMPLEADED VIDE ORDER DTD. 10/05/11 IN I.A.NO.7338/2011 R1 & R2 BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS R3 & 4 BY ADV. SRI.JIJO PAUL R5 BY ADV. SRI.SHEEJO CHACKO THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 8981/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE LICENSE ISSUED BY GOVERNMENT OF INDIA TO M/S. INDIA TELECOM INFRA LTD., DATED 16/08/2007 (PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS NK DIGITAL INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES LTD.) P1(a):COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY GOVERNMENT OF INDIA TO THE PETITIONER SHOWING THE CHANGE OF NAME DATED 19/06/08. P2: COPY OF RELEVANT NOTIFICATION CONFERRING THE STATUS OF TELEGRAPH AUTHORITY ON THE PETITIONERS. P3: COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT DATED 02/12/2010. P4: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 09/02/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs R. BASANT & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 8981 of 2011-W ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT Basant,J. The petitioner has come to this Court seeking issue of directions to respondents 1 and 2 to afford police protection to the petitioner for undertaking the work of construction, installation and operation of a mobile tower in accordance with Ext.P3 permit against any illegal obstruction that may be raised by respondents 3 and 4. Ext.P3 permit is issued by the 5th respondent/Panchayat. A person has got himself impleaded as the additional 6th respondent. 2. According to the petitioner, Ext.P3 permit is valid. He is entitled to undertake the work in accordance with the terms of Ext.P3. Respondents 3 and 4 are raising untenable objections and obstructions. In these circumstances, protection may be ordered, it is prayed. 3. The 5th respondent has entered appearance through counsel. No counter affidavit is filed by the 5th respondent. The additional 6th respondent has entered appearance. He was impleaded as per an application filed by him. Today when the W.P.(C) No. 8981 of 2011 -: 2 :- matter came up for hearing, there is no representation for the additional 6th respondent. 4. Respondents 3 and 4 have filed a counter affidavit. The only objection raised is that the installation and operation of the mobile tower may cause health hazards. The 6th respondent claiming to be a human right activist has also raised identical objections against the installation and operation of the mobile tower. 5. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Our attention has been drawn to the decisions in Essar Telecom Infrastructure (P) Ltd., v. C.I. of Police [2010 (2) KLT 762) (FB)] and Essar Telecom Infrastructure (P) Ltd. v. State of Kerala (2011 (2) KHC 171). Except that the tower, if installed and operated, would cause health hazards to the members of the local community, no other objections are raised. 6. In the light of the principles laid down in the said decisions referred above, we are satisfied that the petitioner is entitled for police protection. 7. In the result: (a) This writ petition is allowed. (b) Respondents 1 and 2 are directed to afford adequate and sufficient police protection to the petitioner to construct, W.P.(C) No. 8981 of 2011 -: 3 :- install and operate the mobile tower in accordance with Ext.P3 permit issued by the 5th respondent against any illegal objections/obstructions that may be raised by respondents 3, 4 and 6. (c) Needless to say that this judgment is issued subject to all observations and conditions in Essar Telecom Infrastructure (P) Ltd. v. State of Kerala (2011 (2) KHC 171). Sd/- R. BASANT (Judge) Sd/- K. SURENDRA MOHAN (Judge) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge W.P.(C) No. 8981 of 2011 -: 4 :-