IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2009 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 30497 of 2009(F) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. USHA HUBERT, KOCHUVEETTIL, XI/798, PATTALAM ROAD, FORT KOCHI, PIN-682 001. 2. JOSEY PANTALO, XI/795, PATTALAM ROAD, FORT KOCHI, PIN-682 001. 3. HAMEED KHAN, XI/792, PATTALAM ROAD, FORT KOCHI, PIN-682 001. 4. M.D.THOMAS, XI/799, PATTALAM ROAD, FORT KOCHI, PIN-682 001. 5. CLIFFORD ISAACS, XI/794, PATTALAM ROAD, FORT KOCHI, PIN-682 001. BY ADV. MR.THOMAS GEORGE RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. CORPORATION OF KOCHI, REP.BY THE SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF KOCHI, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE SUB-DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, FORT KOCHI. 3. VINOD NAIR, S/O.VASUDEVAN NAIR, AUTHORISED ATTORNEY POSIDON INFRASTRUCTURE PVT.LTD GOKULAM BUILDING, VISHRAMGHAG SANGLI, MAHARASTRA-416415, BRANCH OFFICE AT MIG 151, SRISAILAM, GANDHI NAGAR, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682020. 4. INDUS TOWERS LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER, VANKARATH TOWERS, BYE-PASS, PADIVATTOM, ERNAKULAM. 5. DEXTERVAS, H.NO.C.C/XI/796, PATTALAM ROAD, FORT KOCHI, PIN-682 001. BY MR.C.M.RAMESH BABU, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.30497 of 2009-F = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 28th day of October, 2009. JUDGMENT The petitioners say that Ext.P1 filed before the Secretary of the Corporation and Ext.P2 before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Fort Kochi raising complaint regarding a proposal to instal a mobile telecommunication tower are not being considered. Today, the learned counsel for the petitioners states that the Corporation authorities have issued a permit. This, obviously, means that any person aggrieved by that permit will have the right to challenge it before the properly constituted Tribunal under the Panchayat Raj Act. The requirements that the telecommunications have to be maintained under the KMBR, 1999 are enumerated in Chapter XIV of those Rules. The rest of the matter goes under different regulatory laws which have to be taken care of by WPC30497/2009 -: 2 :- the appropriate authorities. This includes matters relating to identification of sites, identification of structural efficiency and other matters. Merely because the petitioners apprehend that the structure is likely to fall and the building on which the proposed structure is to come is feeble in nature, this Court will be overstepping its jurisdiction to interfere, as of now, with the proceedings. This is all the more so because, the petitioners have an alternate remedy before the Tribunal as noted above. For the aforesaid reasons, leaving open all contentions on merits, this writ petition is dismissed declining jurisdiction. THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/291009