IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE MONDAY, THE 10TH MARCH 2008 / 20TH PHALGUNA 1929 RP.No. 288 of 2008(J) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.17944/2007 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER/4TH RESPONDENT ------------------------------------------------- M/S. BHARATHI AIR TEL LTD., N.H.BYE PASS, KUNDANNOOR JUNCTION, MARADU P.O., KOCHI-682 304, REPRESENTED BY ITS HEAD-LEGAL, JAYABAL MENON. BY ADV. SRI.SATHISH NINAN SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW RESPONDENTS: PETITIONER & RES. 1,2,3 AND 5 ------------------------------------------ 1. JANA JAGRUTHI VEDIKE (REG.NO.1077/03), REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, M.K.ISMAIL, MEENJA-MANJESHWARA P.O., KOLIYOOR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT, PIN-671 323. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SECRETARY, MEENJA-GRAMA PANCHAYAT, MEEYAPADAVU POST, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 4. IDEA MOBILE COMMUNICATION LTD., (FORMERLY ESCOTEL MOBILE LTD.), A SUBSIDIARY INDIA CELLULAR LTD., A-30, MOHAN CO-OPERATIVE ESTATE, MADHAVA ROAD, NEW DELHI-110 044. RP 288/08 5. M/S. HUTCISON ESSAR CELLULAR LTD., NO.9/5115, 2ND FLOOR, ASHIS BUILDING, SHANMUGHAM ROAD, KOCHI-31. R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.SHRIHARI SMT.P.VANI R5 BY ADV. SRI.A.M.SHAFFIQUE SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR SRI.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR SRI.ANIL.D.NAIR R3 BY SRI.M.SASINDRAN THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R.P.No.288 of 2008 in W.P.(C) No.17944 of 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated: 10th March, 2008 ORDER I have heard the submissions of Mr.Santhosh Mathew, counsel for the review petitioner, Mr.A.M.Shaffique, counsel for the 5th respondent and Smt.P.Vani, counsel for the 1st respondent. Having regard to the submissions addressed by the learned counsel, I am of the view that there is justification for modifying my judgment dated 12.2.2008. Accordingly, I allow the R.P. recording that even on 12.2.2008 when the judgment was delivered by me, the construction of the towers had been completed and that the respondents 3 and 4 were energising the towers. Therefore the directions in the judgment that respondents 3 and 4 shall not energise the towers before separate orders in that regard issued by the 2nd respondent is deleted and it is made clear that the energisation of the towers by respondents 3 to 5 will be subject to the orders to be passed by the 2nd respondent pursuant to the hearing which is directed to be conducted as per the judgment dated 12.2.2008. The judgment is modified only to the above extent and in all other respects the directions in the judgment will continue. srd PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE W.P.C.No. - 2 -