Rajan Vs The District Collector

PRAYER:- Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of MANDAMUS directing the 1 to 5 Respondents to take immediate and effective steps to stop the installation and remove the Airtel Cellphone Tower / Base Transceiver Station (BTS) situated at Survey No. 513/2, Kurunthencode B Village, Kalkulam Taluk, Kanyakumari District, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 09.04.2026.

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Viveka For R1 to R5 : Mr.M.P.Senthil Counsel for State of Tamilnadu

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The petitioner is deeply aggrieved with the sixth respondent Bharti Airtel Limited in seeking permission to put up a cell phone tower in the premises at Survey No.513/2 Kurunthencode B Village, Kalkulam Taluk, Kanyakumari District.

¶22

The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the erection of a cell phone tower in a residential area would result in the emission of electromagnetic fields, which, in turn, would be hazardous to the health and welfare of the local residents. It is under those circumstances, the petitioner had come forward seeking directions to restrain the sixth respondent from putting up cell phone tower.

¶23

2/5

¶24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶25

WP(MD). No.18214 of 2026

¶26

Mr.M.P.Senthil, learned Counsel for Government stated that though application has been made by the sixth respondent before the concerned authorities, including the Block Development Officer, seeking permission to put up a cell phone tower, no constructive work had commenced.

¶27

It had been stated that the area residents have raised a protest. At this juncture, it may not be appropriate, without hearing all the parties, to restrain the erection of the cell phone tower. However, we make it obligatory on the part of the District Collector and the District Environmental Engineer of the Pollution Control Board to convene a meeting of the petitioner, the other residents, and the sixth respondent, to examine whether the proposed cell phone tower would pose any health hazards and to ensure that the sixth respondent puts in place all necessary safeguards as required by law. Thereafter on being satisfied, the respondents 1, 2 and 5 may pass appropriate orders. Any order passed by them would always be subject to judicial review.

¶28

3/5

¶29

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶30

WP(MD). No.18214 of 2026

¶31