MICROQUAL TECHNO PVT LTD Vs. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE; SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE; NOUSHAD K V, EDAYATTIL HOUSE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These writ petitions are filed at the instance of service providers/infra-structure service providers, who have been issued licence by the Department of Telecommunications for the erection of mobile towers and for their operation. It is also seen that the local authority concerned had issued building permit for the construction of the tower. In some of the cases, it appears, after the issuance of the building permit, the local authority concerned itself had issued a stop memo. Some of the people at the locality entertained an apprehension with regard to the hazards to their health and they physically obstructed the petitioners from taking up the construction of the tower though the same was permitted by the local authority concerned and though they had the licence. When the writ petitions came up before this court, it is seen that this court had issued a direction to the Police to render necessary police protection for the construction of the tower, in case there is no prohibitory order issued by any statutory authority or any court of law. It was also made clear that the commissioning of the tower will be done only after obtaining further orders from this court. The order regarding commissioning as above was issued in view of the reference order dated 24-3-2009 in W.P(C) No.6433/2009 and connected cases, to the Larger Bench. The following are the two questions referred to the Larger Bench:-

(2.) We find that none of the members of the public or for that matter any local authority has challenged either the licence granted to the petitioners by the Department of Telecommunications or the permit granted to the applicants, as the case may be, before this court. Apparently such challenges could not have been taken up before this court in the ordinary course since any person aggrieved by an order passed by the local authority is to pursue his grievance before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions. Similarly any person aggrieved by the licence granted by the Department of Telecommunications is to pursue the matter before the TDSAT. If there is any other issue, the same is to be sorted out before the civil court.

(3.) Be that as it may, it is reported that pursuant to the interim orders granted by this court, the applicants have either completed the construction of the base tower or the same is in the process of construction/completion. In that view of the matter since the issue referred to the Larger Bench has nothing to do with the construction of the base station, we do not think that there is any point in keeping these writ petitions before this court. The construction is undertaken only on a licence issued by the Department of Telecommunications and a permit issued by the local authority concerned. If the local authority concerned has issued a stop memo for any valid reason and in case the same is in force, it is for the service provider/infra-structure service provider to pursue the matter in appropriate proceedings before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions. Similarly, if any of the respondents or for that matter any person is aggrieved by the permit granted by the local authority for the construction of the base station or by the licence issued to the service provider/infra-structure service provider, it is for that person to pursue the matter before the TDSAT. If there is still any other dispute, it is for the party concerned to approach the civil court. Unless interdicted by any such forum or a competent authority, petitioners are free to act according to the licence/permit granted to them.