IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN FRIDAY, THE 13TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 24TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 3210 of 2009(F) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- DISHNET WIRELESS LTD NO.9419/33/2365, R.R.ARCADE, GEETHANJALI BUS STOP, N.H.BYPASS, THAMMANAM P.O., VYTTILA, COCHIN - 32 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY AND CIRCLE MANAGER, LEGAL, V.K.SAJITH. BY ADVS. MR.V.G.ARUN, MR.T.R.HARIKUMAR. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHALAKKUDY. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, TRICHUR. 3. V.P.JOSE, VADASSERI HOUSE, PARIYARAM, CHALAKKUDY, TRICHUR DISTRICT. 4. M.K.PARAMESWARAN, MONATHOTTATHIL HOUSE, PARIYARAM, TRICHUR DISTRICT. 5. P.M.JABBAR, PALAMKOTTAKARAN HOUSE, PARIYARAM, TRICHUR. 6. P.M.SHAJI, DO. DO. 7. M.J.JINSE, MAMINISSERI HOUSE, PARIYARAM, TRICHUR. W.P.(C). NO.3210/2009-F: 8. M.J.JIJO, DO. DO. 9. K.K.RAMACHANDRAN, KARAPPILLY HOUSE, PARIYARAM, TRICHUR DIST. 10. T.A.SOJAN, THEKKEKKARA HOUSE, PARIYARAM, TRICHUR DIST. 11. T.A.SONI, DO. DO. 12. RAJAN, S/O.VILASINI, THEKKEPATTU HOUSE, PARIYARAM, TRICHUR DIST. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR. BENJAMIN PAUL, R9 BY ADVS. MR.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR, SMT.P.A.ANITHA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/02/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY, Ag.C.J. & P.BHAVADASAN, J. -------------------------------------- W.P(C)No.3210 of 2009 ------------------------------------- Dated 13th February, 2009 JUDGMENT Koshy, Ag.C.J . Petitioner is a company engaged in providing telecommunication and related services. The petitioner got all the licences required. Petitioner approached the local authority for permission to construct the tower. Local authority granted permission as can be seen from Ext.P3. It is the contention of the petitioner that local people are obstructing construction of the tower apprehending health hazards. As per the statutory conditions, petitioner has to construct the building after considering the structural safety etc. Both sides have produced various literatures regarding the effect of the use of transmission towers. It is also contended by the respondents that licence has to be issued under section 233 of the Panchayat Raj Act for functioning the transmission tower. According to the petitioner, it is not necessary. In any event, that question need be considered only at the time when machineries are installed and transmission is being started. Here, what is done is only construction of the tower. If the local residents have any objection regarding the construction of the tower, they have to obtain W.P.(C)No.3210/2009 2 prohibitory orders from the statutory authority or from the court. In the absence of such prohibitory orders, they cannot obstruct the construction using muscle power. Rule of the land should be followed. It is for the respondents to approach the Panchayat detailing all the objections and Panchayat should consider their objections also before functioning of the tower. Construction of the tower cannot be obstructed. Therefore, so long as the construction is being done with valid permit and in the absence of statutory prohibitory orders, police should give assistance and effective protection for the construction of the tower. This will not prevent the contesting respondents or local people for approaching the statutory authority or civil court for appropriate orders. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. J.B.KOSHY ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN JUDGE tks