UJAGAR SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners, who are residents of village Kharian Tehsil R.S. Pura of Jammu District, have filed this writ petition, seeking restraint order against the Respondent Nos. 1 to 6 in installing the Cellular Tower in the land of Respondent No. 7, on the ground that the erection of the Tower is being undertaken in the land which is purely residential area and it has the chances of endangering the lives of the inhabitants of the area. It is further contended that erection of huge tower by Respondents will be a continuous threat to the lives of the inhabitants, as the same is being installed near the houses of the Petitioners. While making submissions, learned Counsel for the Petitioners, has stated that Petitioner No. 1 is a heart patient and by erecting the Tower in question, his problem will increase further.

(2.) The stand of the Respondent No. 6, on the other hand is that the erection of the tower is not being undertaken in a residential area but in a commercial area. To support its contention, Respondent No. 6 has relied upon the site plan attached by son of Petitioner No. 1 with a civil suit filed before the Civil Court, wherein it has been clearly mentioned that Petitioner No. 1, besides his house has constructed seven shops and he could not be allowed to say that area is purely a residential area. It is further contended that on same issue a civil suit was filed by the son of Petitioner No. 1, wherein no interim injunction was issued and said suit was subsequently dismissed in default. Once remedy was exhausted by the Petitioners, they cannot maintain the present writ petition. The other ground taken is that erection of Cellular Towers does not, in any way cause health hazards to the people residing nearby nor does it infringes any right to life. It is further contended that under Section 4 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, Respondent No. 6 has been awarded a licence to provide basic telephone services and under Section 10 of the Act, the Respondents are well within their rights to establish and maintain lines and posts under, over, along or across any immoveable property.

(3.) Respondent No. 7, who is owner of the land upon which the Tower is being erected, has filed his separate objections wherein it is stated that writ petition has been filed just to harass him and settle past scores. He further states that all the Petitioners are related to each other and they have not raised any objection in erection of Tower of another Telecom Company in the same area during the pendency of this writ petition. He further contends that having failed in civil litigation filed by son of Petitioner No. 1, the present writ petition has been filed which is not maintainable.