IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 28109 of 2006(U)
1. M/S.RELIANCE COMMUNICATIONS LTD.,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE VARKALA MUNICIPALITY,
... Respondent
2. THE SECRETARY,
For Petitioner :SRI.V.G.ARUN
For Respondent :SRI.J.S.AJITHKUMAR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
Dated :28/03/2007
O R D E R
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C)No.28109 of 2006
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated: 28th March, 2007
JUDGMENT
Ext.P8 order issued by the 1st respondent-Municipality directing
the writ petitioner-Mobile Telephone Company to stop the
construction of a mobile telephone tower within the area of the 1st
respondent-Municipality till clarifications are received from the Chief
Town Planner is under challenge. The petitioner also seeks a writ of
mandamus commanding the 1st respondent-Municipality to permit the
petitioner to construct the mobile telephone tower within the
municipal area.
2. Adv.J.S.Ajith Kumar, Standing Counsel takes notice on behalf
of the 1st respondent-Municipality. Though Mr.Ajith Kumar justifies
Ext.P8 as one issued in public interest, I am afraid that the issue is
covered against the Municipality in view of the judgment of the
Division Bench of this court in Reliance Infocom Ltd. v.
Chemanchery Grama Panchayat (2006(4) KLT 695). I had
occasion to go through the affidavit sworn to on behalf of the Atomic
Energy Regulatory Board before the Bombay High Court and also the
report submitted by the World Health Organisation regarding the evil
effects of radiation from mobile telephone towers on the health of
neighbouring people. The affidavit is to the effect that the Atomic
W.P.C.No.28109/06 – 2 –
Energy Regulatory Board has nothing to do with the issue and that
the radiation from the mobile telephone towers is relatively less. The
affidavit submitted by the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board was in
fact considered by the Division Bench in the aforesaid decision.
Considering the observations of the Division Bench of this court in
Reliance Infocom Ltd. v. Chemanchery Grama Panchayat
(supra) and the stand taken by the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board
and also the findings in the report submitted by the World Health
Organisation, I am of the view that the apprehension of the citizenry
of the 1st respondent-Panchayat that there will be serious hazards to
their health on account of radiation emanating from the mobile tower
to be installed by the petitioner are irrational. The Writ Petition
accordingly will stand allowed. Ext.P8 order is quashed and the 1st
respondent-Municipality is directed to issue permit to the petitioner
for constructing the mobile telephone tower provided the petitioner is
possessed all consents and certificates which are statutorily required.
srd PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE