IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE FRIDAY, THE 4TH APRIL 2008 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 10915 of 2008(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ M/S. IDEA MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS LTD., SECOND FLOOR, MERCY ESTATE, RAVIPURAM, COCHIN-682 015, REPRESENTED BY ITS SENIOR MANAGER, SRI.RAMACHANDRAN C. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW SRI.SATHISH NINAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE SECRETARY, DESAMANGALAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT, DESAMANGALAM, THRISSUR DISTRICT, 2. THE DESAMANGALAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT COMMITTEE, DESAMANGALAM, THRISSUR DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, J. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W.P.(C).No.10915/2008-Y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Dated this the 4th day of April, 2008 J U D G M E N T Even though the respondents were served with notice by Special Messenger deputed by this Court, they have not entered appearance before this Court to resist the prayers in the writ petition. One of the grounds raised in the writ petition is that Ext.P2 order was passed cancelling Ext.P1 permit passed by the Secretary of the Panchayat without issuing notice to the petitioner before hand. 2. Heard Sri.Santhosh Mathew learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Counsel submitted that the decision of the Panchayat committee referred to in Ext.P2 was taken by the Panchayat even without notice to the petitioner. 3. In the above circumstances, I dispose of the writ petition issuing the following directions:- i. Ext.P2 is quashed. ii. The committee, the second respondent, is directed to take a fresh decision in the question whether Ext.P1 building permit which had been granted to the petitioner should be revoked, after hearing the petitioner and a representative of the people who submitted complaint regarding the proposed mobile tower. W.P.(C).No.10915/2008-Y 2 iii. Fresh decision as directed above has to be taken at the earliest in the very next meeting of the committee coming after the petitioner produces a copy of this judgment. iv. Decision taken should be made available to the petitioner. v. The committee of the second respondent shall have due regard to the judgment of this Court in Reliance Infocom Ltd. v. Chemanchery Grama Panchayat [2006 (4) KLT 695] while taking fresh decision as necessary. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, Judge ms