IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2011 / 17TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 17956 of 2011(T) -------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------- SHAJI MATHEW, PARTNER, PALATHARA CONSTRUCTIONS, CHANGANACHERRY, RESIDING AT PALATHARA HOUSE, THURUTHY P.O., CHANGANASSERY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.PHILIP MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. THE S.I. OF POLICE, VATTAPPARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695028. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001 3. NEDUMANGAD MUNICIPALITY, MUNICIPAL OFFICE, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY-695541 4. RAJESH, S/O.SUKUMARAN NAIR, "AVITTAM", VENCOTTE P.O., VATTAPARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695028 5. YESUDAS, S/O.CHANDRAN, "YESUDAS BHAVANAM", VENCOTTEE P.O., VATTAPPARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695028 6. SUBHADRA, W/O.SUKUMARAN NAIR, JAYAN BHAVAN, VENCOTTEE P.O., VATTAPPARA, THIUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695028 WP(C).No. 17956 of 2011(T) -2- 7. RAAJI, W/O.JAYAN, JAYAN BHAVAN, VENCOTTE P.O., VATTAPPARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695028 8. MANJU, W/O.VIJAYAN AASARI, VIJAYA BHAVAN, VENCOTTEE P.O., VATTAPPARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695028 9. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, KERALA GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695001 10. UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATIONS AND IT, DEPARTMENT OF TELE COMMUNICATIONS, SANCHAR BHAVAN, 20, ASHOKA ROAD, NEW DELHI-110001. 11. BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD., REP. BY ITS CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001 ADV. SRI.C.S.RAMANATHAN FOR R11 GOVT. PLEADER SMT.C.M.CHARISMA SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR, ASST. S.G.I THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 17956 of 2011(T) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS EXT.P1:- COPY OF CIRCULAR DATED 30/10/10 EXT.P2:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 24/06/11 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P3:- COPY OF THE RECEIPT DT.27/06/11 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ W. P. C. No.17956 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 8th day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT Abdul Rehim, J Petitioner is seeking police protection with respect to construction of mobile transmission tower, which is being obstructed by respondents 4 to 8 and others acting under them. The tower is being constructed for use of the 11th respondent and by virtue of Ext.P1 circular issued by the 9th respondent such construction does not require any permission from the local authority, the 3rd respondent herein. Alleged obstruction is being caused by respondents 4 to 8 on the apprehension that establishment of the transmission tower may cause health hazards. 2. The legal issue regarding right for erection of mobile towers and the apprehended health hazards which may arise, was the subject matter of a Division Bench decision of this Court in Essar Telecom Infrastructure (P) Ltd. v. State of W. P. C. No.17956 of 2011 -2- Kerala (2011(2), KLT 516). It is held that the establishment of transmission towers will not cause any health hazards and it could not be obstructed. 3. Respondents 4 to 8 appeared through Adv.S.Rajeev and contended that the erection of transmission tower will cause health hazards to the family and members of respondents 4 and 8 who are residing very close to the site in question. However, since the issue is covered by the decision cited above, we are not inclined to entertain such apprehension. Learned counsel for respondents 4 to 8 had drawn our attention to the circular dated 16/5/2011 issued by the Government, in which the self Government institutions were advised to take steps to find out alternate site, wherever there is stiff objection regarding establishment of transmission tower. It is further stated that 5th respondent herein had filed W.P.(C) No.18120/2011 before this court seeking implementation of the directives contained in the above said Circular. However, we are of the W. P. C. No.17956 of 2011 -3- considered opinion that it is left open to respondents 4 to 8 to pursue remedies, if any available, on the basis of the above said circular and to pursue remedy against the circular which exempt the petitioner from the obligation of getting permission under the Municipalities Act or the Building Rules. 4. Considering the aspects as stated above, we are of the opinion that the petitioner is doing the construction works in a legal manner and that the respondents 4 to 8 have no manner of right to obstruct such activity. Hence, respondents 1 and 2 are bound to afford necessary protection to remove obstructions if any caused and to facilitate the petitioner to complete the construction work of the transmission tower. 5. Under such circumstances, respondents 1 and 2 are directed to take effective steps to remove obstructions if any caused to the construction work being carried out by the petitioner and to afford necessary protection for completing W. P. C. No.17956 of 2011 -4- the work in question. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE C. K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE kns & dpk/-