PRADEEP KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The case of the petitioner is that respondent No.5, General Manager, Bharti Infratel Limited Company, is installing mobile tower on the land owned and possessed by respondents No.6 and 7, which is near to the residential area. It is averred that there are already two mobile towers, which are affecting the health of the nearby residents as well as the petitioner. It is further contended that as per the Notification dated 21.06.2017, issued by the Department of Information Technology, Government of Himachal Pradesh, prior permission of local body etc. is necessary to be obtained for installation of such communication tower(s), but it is not forthcoming whether such permission has been obtained by respondent No.5. Under these circumstances the petitioner has made representations (Annexures P-3 and P-4), but the same have not been decided till date by respondent No.4, Sub Divisional Officer, (Civil), Dehra, District Kangra, H.P.

(2.) We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the records.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has already made representations (Annexures P-3 and P-4) under Clause 9.2 of the aforesaid Notification and the said representations are pending on the file of the Committee, constituted for the purpose of Clause 9 of the aforesaid Notification.