IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH JUNE 2011 / 25TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 12684 of 2011(I) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- INDUS TOWERS LIMITED, VANKARATH TOWER, 8TH FLOOR, N.H.BYEPASS, PALARIVATTOM,KOCHI-24, REPRESENTED BY ITS DULY AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE, PREMAKRISHNAN NAIR.M.N., HEAD LEGAL. BY ADV. SRI.P.SATHISAN RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOLLAM DIST-691 001. 2. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KUNDARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM-691 001. 3. JAGATHAMMA, JINU BHAVANAM, PULLIYILA, NALLILA.P.O., KOLLAM-691 515. 4. MUTHUBEEVI, PULLIYILA,NALLILA.P.O., KOLLAM-691 515. 5. BUSHARA, PULLIYILA, NALLILA.P.O., KOLLAM-691 515. 6. NEDUMPANA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, KOLLAM TALUK, KOLLAM DIST-691001. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. VENUGOPAL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.12684/2011 I APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE FOR INFRASTRUCTURE PROVIDER CATEGORY - I (IP - I). P1(A): COPY OF CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY GOVT. OF INDIA WITH RESPECT TO THE NAME CHANGE. P1(B): COPY OF THE LICENSE ISSUED BY CENTRAL GOVT. TO ONE OF THE SERVICE PROVIDERS. P2: COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT DTD. 29/01/11. P3: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P4: COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO THE P3 COMPLAINT DTD. 01/04/2011. P5: COPY OF THE RELEVANT NOTIFICATION CONFERRING THE STATUS OF TELEGRAPH AUTHORITY ON THE PETITIONERS. P6: COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN WPC.NO.8753/2011 DTD. 28/03/2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------- WPC No.12684 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th June, 2011 JUDGMENT Basant, J. This petition is filed by the petitioner seeking issue of directions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to respondents 1 and 2 to afford adequate police protection for the petitioner to construct, install and operate a mobile tower in accordance with Ext.P1 regular permit issued by the 6th respondent - Panchayat. 2. According to the petitioner, Ext.P2 permit issued by the Panchayat is legal and valid. No one has chosen to challenge Ext.P2 award. Unnecessary and illegal obstructions are being raised by respondents 3 to 5 against the work undertaken by the petitioner in accordance with Ext.P2 permit. They have no right to obstruct. Protection may be afforded, it is prayed. 3. Respondents 3 to 6 though served have not chosen to enter appearance to resist the prayer for police protection. WPC No.12684 of 2011 2 4. The learned Government Pleader after taking instructions from respondents 1 and 2 submits that it is true that respondents 3 to 5 had earlier attempted to obstruct, but they, after discussions and proper advice, are not causing any obstructions now. 4. 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). Ext.P2 is a regular permit. Nothing is there to show that there is any challenge against Ext.P2. We are in these circumstances satisfied that police protection can be afforded following the precedents referred above. 5. In the result, a) This petition is allowed. b) Respondents 1 and 2 are directed to afford adequate and sufficient police protection to the petitioner for undertaking the work of construction, installation and operation of a Telecommunication tower in accordance with Ext.P2 permit issued by the sixth respondent. c) Needless to say that the order of protection WPC No.12684 of 2011 3 granted shall be subject to all the observations and conditions in Essar Telecom Infrastructure (P) Ltd. v State of Kerala (supra). R.BASANT JUDGE K.SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE css/