The High Court held that after the previous decision, the petitioner must approach the District Telecom Committee (DTC) to resolve installation issues before proceeding. The District Police Chief was directed to maintain law and order until the DTC makes a decision.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
MONDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 14TH POUSHA, 1942
WP(C).No.11413 OF 2020(B)
PETITIONER:
INDUS TOWERS LIMITED
CIRCLE OFFICE AT VANKARATH TOWERS, 8TH FLOOR, NH 47, PLARIVATTOM, COCHIN - 24, REP. BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER HEAD LEGAL, RAJKUMAR PAVOTHIL, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O. P. NARENDRAN, RESIDING AT MIDHILA, THAMARAMULANGARA, TRIPUNITHURA P. O.
BY ADVS.
SRI.P.SATHISAN SMT.KRISHNA.G.NATH SMT.DONA AUGUSTINE
RESPONDENTS:
ALAPPUZHA, CCSB ROAD, CIVIL STATION WARD,
ALAPPUZHA BAZAR P. O., KERALA - 688 012.
3 DPARTMENT OF TELECOMMUNICATION O/O. SR. DEPUTY DIRECTOR GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS, CTSD COMPLEX, GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHRA P. O., ERNAKULAM - 682020, REPRESENTED BY ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL (TECHNOLOGY), KERALA LSA.
R3 BY ADV. SHRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASG OF INDIA R4 BY ADV. MR.V.N.SANKARJEE, SC, AROOR GRAMAPANCHAYAT
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04.01.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).11294/2020(J), THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.11413 OF 2020
2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 is engaged in offering passive infrastructure services to all telecom operators and other wireless service providers. The company has been issued with Ext.P5 building permit by the 4th respondent for installation of a tower in Sy. No.33/1 C1 of Aroor Village, Alappuzha District. While the company was engaged in the process of establishing the tower, they are stated to have met with resistance from the residents of the locality. When work was disrupted, the petitioner approached the respondents 1 and 2 and requested for protection to enable them to carry out the work. According to them, no support was extended in spite of the fact that Telegraph and Telephone service has been declared as an essential service as per the Disaster Management Act, 2005 and also under the relevant provisions of the Essential Services Maintenance Act, 1968.
WP(C).No.11413 OF 2020
3
establishment and all other entities connected thereto. Instead of acting in terms of Exhibit P4, the Police are taking a lethargic attitude which gives an added impetus to antisocial elements to disrupt the work, contends the petitioner. It is in the afore circumstances that the petitioner approached this Court seeking a direction to the respondents to provide adequate protection to the staff and employees of the petitioner to proceed with the construction of the telecommunication tower on the strength of Exhibit P5 permit without any threat, obstruction or hindrance from any person.
WP(C).No.11413 OF 2020
4
redressing their grievance and on submission of such representation, the DTC shall consider the same with notice to the affected parties and take a decision as expeditiously as possible.
that law and order is maintained.
This Writ Petition will stand disposed of.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
JUDGE
sru
WP(C).No.11413 OF 2020
5
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11413/2020
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION OF PETITIONER COMPANY DATED 10.1.2008.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT EXTRACT OF CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION OF PETITIONER COMPANY DATED 24.7.2008. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PAPER PUBLICATION IN MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DATED 06.06.2020. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 06.05.2020. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED BY THE AROOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT DATED 23.12.2019. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 19.05.2020. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO 2ND RESPONDENT ALONG WITH ITS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT DATED 04.06.2020.
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL
//TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner can proceed with the construction of the tower immediately or must first exhaust the remedy of approaching the District Telecom Committee (DTC) as per the previous judgment.
Whether the District Police Chief is directed to maintain law and order pending the decision of the DTC.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Indus Towers Ltd., Palarivattom v. Sub Inspector of Police, Thodupuzha and OrsFollowed¶4
Indus Towers Ltd., Palarivattom v. Sub Inspector of Police, Thodupuzha and Ors [2014 (4) KLT 306]
Indus Towers Limited
District Police Chief, Alappuzha
Station House Officer, Aroor Police Station
Department of Telecommunication
Aroor Gramapanchayath
District Collector, Alappuzha
Raja Vijayaraghavan V
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
