IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 7TH DECEMBER 2009 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 35207 of 2009(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- CHAITHANYA RESIDENT'S WELFARE ASSOCIATION, REG.NO.K.292/2009 KUDAMALOOR REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY HAVING ITS OFFICE AT 73/VII AYMANAM, KUDAMALLOOR P.O., KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHOSH THOMAS KANDAMCHIRA SRI.V.N.SASIDHARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. GYAMANAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, AYMANAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH OFFICE, AYMANAM, KOTTAYAM. 2. WIRELESS TT INFO SERVICE LTD., REG. OFFICE AT 5/9/62, 5TH FLOOR, KHAN LATEEF KHAN ESTATE, FATEH MAIDAN ROAD, HYDRERABAD-500001, REPRESENTED BY ITS CIRCLE OFFICE MANAGER SUDEVAN V.D., J & CO., CHAMBERS MANIMALA ROAD, EDAPPALLY, KOCHI-24. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.35207 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of December, 2009 JUDGMENT Notice to the respondents dispensed with, preserving their right for re-hearing of the matter if aggrieved by the order being issued hereunder. The petitioner is a residents' association. They state that the second respondent has been issued Ext.P2 permit to erect a mobile telecommunication tower. They say that if a mobile tower is erected in the site in question, that will result in health hazards. Even in Ext.P3 representation, no specific health hazard is pointed out. The petitioner does not also have a case that at least its members do not use mobile phones. Larger public need for telecommunication service vis.a.vis. mere apprehensions of health hazards have necessarily stand for consideration in terms of the judgment of this Court in Reliance Infocom Ltd. v. Chemancherry Grama Panchayat [2006(4) WPC.35207/09 2 KLT 695]. In view of Ext.P5, the first respondent will take up any complaint that has been placed before it, including Ext.P6 and do the needful in terms of Ext.P5. However, having regard to the last paragraph of Ext.P5, the first respondent will not issue any stop memo unless satisfied that there are grounds referable to the Kerala Municipality Building Rules, 1999 or the relevant provisions of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 warranting any such action. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. kkb.8/12.