IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 17TH JUNE 2011 / 27TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 4195 of 2011(Y) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. INDUS TOWERS LTD., CIRCLE OFFICE AT VANKARATH TOWERS, 8TH FLOOR, NH-47, PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI-24, REP. BY ITS HEAD-LEGAL, PREMAKRISHNAN NAIR. 2. SHIBU MATHEW, S/O.MATHEW, PALATHARA HOUSE, THURUTHY P.O., CHANGANASSERY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, (PARTNER, PALATHARA CONSTUCTIONS, CHANGANACHERRY). BY ADV. SRI.V.PHILIP MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE S.I. OF POLICE, TIRURANGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676 306. 2. THE C.I. OF POLICE, TIRURANGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676 306. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MALAPPURAM.676 505 4. ABDURAHIMAN NAGAR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, ABDURAHIMAN NAGAR P.O., MALAPPURAM, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN-676 505. 5. MUHAMMED HAJI, CHERICHIL HOUSE, V.K.PADY, MUMPURAM, TIRURANGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676306. sts 2/- -2- WP(C)NO.4195/2011 6. SHAHUL HAMEED, THARI HOUSE, V.K.PADY, MUMPURAM, TIRURANGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676 306. 7. MUSTAFA, CHOLACKAL HOUSE, V.K.PADY, MUMPURAM, TIRURANGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676 306. 8. SHIHAD, CHERICHIL HOUSE, V.K.PADY, MUMPURAM, TIRURANGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676 306. 9. ABDUPPA, THARI HOUSE, V.K.PADY, MUMPURAM, TIRURANGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676 306. 10. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, KERALA GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 11. UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATIONS AND IT, DEPARTMENT OF TELE COMMUNICATIONS, SANCHAR BHAVAN, 20, ASHOKA ROAD, NEW DELHI-110 001. R1 TO R3, R10 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts 3/- -3- WP(C)NO.4195/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES, NATIONALCAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI AND HARYANA. P2 COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE FOR COMMENCEMENT OF BUSINESS ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES , NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI AND HARYANA. P3 COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE NO.177/2008 DATED 10/01/2008 ISSUED BY THE MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATIONS & IT, DEPARTMENT OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS. P4 COPY OF THE FRESH CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION CONSEQUENT UPON CHANGE OF NAME ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES, NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI AND HARYANA. P4(A) COPY OF THE EXHIBIT P4. P5 COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION SEND BY THE DIRECTOR (CS-III) OF THE MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATIONS & IT, DEPARTMENT OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS,NEW DELHI. P6 COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT NO.B1-4836/2010 DATED 30/12/2010 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT PANCHAYAT TO FIRST PETITIONER. P7 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 20/01/2011 SEND TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P8 COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPTS. P9 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03/02/2011 PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM IN IA.NO.124/2011 IN APPEAL NO.98/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO.JUDGE sts R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------- WPC No.4195 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th June, 2011 JUDGMENT Basant, J. The petitioners have come before this Court seeking issue of directions under Article 226 of the Constitution to respondents 1 to 3 to afford police protection to the petitioners for the construction of a mobile tower in accordance with Ext.P6 regular permit issued by the fourth respondent Panchayat against illegal obstruction that is raised by respondents 5 to 9. 2. Service is complete. Party respondents 5 to 9 have not chosen to enter appearance. The learned Government Pleader represents respondents 1 to 3 and 10. The learned Assistant Solicitor General of India appears for the 11th respondent. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Ext.P6 is a regular permit. The same is valid. Sufficient conditions have been imposed under Ext.P6. No challenge has been raised by any one so far. The Panchayat had earlier issued a stop memo. The same was challenged and the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions has upheld the challenge as per Ext.P10. WPC No.4195 of 2011 2 4. As indicated earlier, none of the respondents have raised any objections against the proposed construction. Our attention has been drawn to Essar Telecom Infrastructure (P) Ltd., v C.I. of Police [2010(2) KLT 762) (FB)] and Essar Telecom Infrastructure (P) Ltd. v State of Kerala (2011(2) KHC 171). We are satisfied in these circumstances that police protection can be granted to the petitioners. 5. In the result, a) This petition is allowed. b) Respondents 1 to 3 are directed to afford police protection for the petitioners for undertaking the construction of a mobile tower strictly in accordance with Ext.P6 building permit issued by the fourth respondent Panchayat against any illegal obstruction that may be raised by respondents 5 to 9. c) Needless to say that the order of protection granted shall be subject to all the observations and conditions in Essar Telecom Infrastructure (P) Ltd. v State of Kerala (supra). sd/-R.BASANT JUDGE sd/- K.SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE css/ true copy P.S.TO JUDGE