Disposed

S.Kannan v. Shajahan

Kerala HC3 Feb 2021WP(C)/2282/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging mobile tower construction near residences, the High Court of Kerala directed the District Telecom Committee to consider representations filed by petitioners after affording a hearing to petitioners and other respondents within 6 weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 2nd respondent to consider representations (Exts.P6, P9) after hearing petitioners and respondents 3 and 7 within 6 weeks.

S.Kannan Vs Shajahan — Consumer Protection | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

WP(C).No.2282 OF 2021(I)

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

¶6

WEDNESDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 14TH MAGHA,1942

¶7

WP(C).No.2282 OF 2021(I)

PETITIONER/S:

1 S.KANNAN

AGED 50 YEARS

S/O. SADASIVAN, ACTION COUNCIL CHAIRMAN, ASOKA MANDIRAM, SARGADHARA NAGAR-226, IRAVIPURAM P.O., MUNDAKKAL VILLAGE, KOLLAM-691011.

¶12

2 RUKMINI VIDYADHARAN AGED 75 YEARS

¶13

W/O. LATE VIDYADHARAN, ALAKAPURI, SNEHADHARA NAGAR, IRAVIPURAM P.O., KOLLAM-691 011.

¶14

3 KAMALUDHEEN AGED 55 YEARS

¶15

S/O. KOYAKUTTY, PADIPPURA VEEDU, SNEHADHARA NAGAR, IRAVIPURAM P.O., KOLLAM-691 011.

¶16

4 JUBAIRY, AGED 59 YEARS,W/O. MAJEED, MUPRASSERI THODIYIL, SARGADHARA NAGAR-226, IRAVIPURAM P.O., MUNDAKKAL VILLAGE, KOLLAM-691 01.

¶17

5 MUMTHAS BEEGAM, AGED 53 YEARS, NANDHANAM, SNEHANAGAR-188, IRAVIPURAM P.O., KOLLAM-691 011.

¶18

6 SABU,AGED 50 YEARS S/O. ISMAYIL KUNJU, NADAKKAVIL VEEDU, SNEHANAGAR188, IRAVIPURAM P.O., KOLLAM-691 011.

¶19

BY ADVS.

¶20

SMT.V.H.JASMINE SRI.JESWIN P.VARGHESE SMT.K.P.SURYA

¶21

RESPONDENT/S:

¶22

1 SHAJAHAN

¶23

AGED 57 YEARS S/O. ISMAYIL KUNJU, BISMILLA MANZIL, NO.203, SNEHADHARA NAGAR, IRAVIPURAM P.O., KOLLAM-691 011.

¶24

WP(C).No.2282 OF 2021(I)

¶25

¶26

2 THE DISTRICT TELECOM COMMITTEE (DTC) KOLLAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM, COLLECTORATE, COLLECTORATE P.O., KOLLAM-691 013.

¶27

3 THE SECRETARY KOLLAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, NEAR RAILWAY STATION, MUNDAKAL P.O., KOLLAM-691 001.

¶28

4 THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER CORPORATION OFFICE, KOLLAM, NEAR RAILWAY STATION, MUNDAKKAL P.O., KOLLAM-691 001.

¶29

5 THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, KOLLAM,OFFICE OF DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, MUNDAKKAL, MUNDAKKAL P.O., KOLLAM-691 001.

¶30

6 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ERAVIPURAM POLICE STATION, ERAVIPURAM P.O., KOLLAM-691 011.

¶31

7 INDUS TOWERS LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS NODAL OFFICER, 8TH FLOOR, VANKARATH TOWER, PALARIVATTOM P.O., ERNAKULAM-682 024.

¶32

8 ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, DISTRICT OFFICE, KOLLAM P.O., KOLLAM-691 001.

¶33

OTHER PRESENT:

¶34

SC SRI.T.NAVEEN

¶35

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶36

WP(C).No.2282 OF 2021(I)

¶37

¶38

JUDGMENT

¶39

Dated this the 3^rd day of February 2021

¶40

Petitioners are aggrieved by the construction of mobile

¶41

tower near their residence by the 7^th respondent. It is stated that they have submitted various representations before the official respondents and since no positive action was taken, this Writ Petition was filed.

¶42

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as

¶43

the learned Government Pleader and Sri.P.Sathian, learned

¶44

counsel for the 7^th respondent.

¶45

According to the 7^th respondent, construction is

¶46

completed with all permits from the competent authorities.

¶47

However it is seen that petitioners have approached the 2^nd respondent with Exts.P6 and P9 representations. Therefore, there shall be a direction to the 2^nd respondent to consider the representations Exts.P6 and P9 after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners as well as respondents 3 and 7 within a period of 6 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.

Sd/-

P.V.ASHA

JUDGE

rkc

WP(C).No.2282 OF 2021(I)

¶53

¶54

APPENDIX

¶55

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶56

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE UDAYATHARA RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION DATED 18.6.2020 NO.152/2020. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 23.10.2020 IN WPC NO.22721/2020. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS DATED 27.10.2020 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 28.10.2020 SUBMITTED BY IST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT FOR EXHIBIT P4 BEARING NO.32065 DATED 28.10.2020 ISSUED BY 4TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEARING NO.237143/2020 DATED 9.11.2020. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE INFORMATION NO.E2/R4/32065/2020 DATED 23.11.2020 ISSUED BY 4TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 1.12.2020 SUBMITTED BY PETITIONERS BEFORE N.K.PREMACHANDRAN, M.P. EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 18.1.2021 FILED BY THE IST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

S.Kannan v. Shajahan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Kannan v. Shajahan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Northstone Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs South Indian Bank

Kumaran M.V Vs the District Police Chief

Muhammed Haneefa Vs the State of Kerala

Baby Chummar Vs Ms Beethi Balachandran

Hotel Vani Vs the Hotel and Restaurants Approval and Classification Committee

Chovattukunnel Thomas Vs the Divisional Forest Officer