IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH MARCH 2011 / 25TH PHALGUNA 1932 WA.No. 2561 of 2002(B) ---------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN OP.14766/2002 Dated 02/07/2002 .................... APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS: ------------------------------ 1. FEROKE, KARUVANTHIRUTHY, RAMANATTUKARA, CHERUVANNUR, GRAMAVIKASANA FORUM, 2/338, REGD.454/02, P.O.KARUVANTHIRUTHY - 673 643, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT SRI.V.SIVARAMAKRISHNAN, "SANKAR HOUSE", CHERUVANNUR, CALICUT DISTRICT. 2. P.K.MOHAMMED, GENERAL SECRETARY, FEROKE, KARUVANTHIRUTHY, RAMANATTUKARA, CHERUVANNUR, GRAMA VIKASANA FORUM, 2/333, REGD.454/02, P.O.KARUVANTHIRUTHY, KOZHIKODE DIST., RESIDING AT VATTAMPARAMBATH HOUSE, P.O.KARUVANTHIRUTHY, FEROKE. 3. T.ABOOBACKER, TREASURER, FEROKE, KARUVANTHIRUTHY, RAMANATTUKARA, CHERUVANNUR, GRAMAVIKASANA FORUM, 2/333, REGD.454/02, P.O.KARUVANTHIRUTHY, KOZHIKODE, RESIDING AT ABILASH MANZIL, P.O.KARUVANTHIRUTHY, FEORKE. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR, SENIOR ADVOCATE RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ---------------------------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATION, NEW DELHI - 1. 2. SRI.M.S.VARMA, HON'BLE JUSTICE & CHAIRMAN, TELECOM REGULAROTY AUTHORITY, NEW DELHI. WA.No. 2561 of 2002(B) 3. THE BHARATH SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, B.S.N.L., NEW DELHI. 4. THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, THE BHARATH SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. THE GENERAL MANAGER, BHARATH SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED, KOZHIKODE. ADV. SRI.S.PRASANTH, ADDL.CGSC FOR R1TO5 SRI.SAJEESH.K.B., ADDL.CGSC FOR R1 &3 TO 5 SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR GENERAL SRI.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN,ASST.SOLICITOR GENERAL THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.Chelameswar, C.J. & Antony Dominic, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.A.No. 2561 OF 2002 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 16th day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT Antony Dominic, J. Petitioners in O.P.No.14766 of 2002 are the appellants in this writ appeal. 2. The Original Petition was filed mainly for a declaration that charging of rates for rental towards telephone installations from the petitioners and other residents of the area represented by the first petitioner forum is unconstitutional and violative of their fundamental rights. 3. By the impugned judgment the learned Single Judge upheld the decision following the Division Bench of this Court in O.P. No.4485 of 2002. Aggrieved by this judgment, the writ appeal has been filed. 4. A reading of the judgment under appeal shows that the learned Judge followed a Division Bench judgment of this Court, where the very same levy has been upheld by this Court. WA No. 2561 of 2002 -:2:- 5. We have gone through the said decision which has been produced by the respondents along with the statement presented on 19.06.2002. The said judgment shows that the basis of classification adopted by the respondents is the census report and such basis was upheld by the Division Bench in the aforesaid judgment. Since the issue raised in this Original Petition, from which appeal arises, is therefore fully covered by the said judgment, we see no reason to take a different view. In the result, we see no illegality in the judgment under appeal. The Writ Appeal is only to be dismissed. We do so. J.Chelameswar, Chief Justice. Antony Dominic, Judge. ttb WA No. 2561 of 2002 -:3:-