IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 10810 of 2007(J)
1. HUTCHISON ESSAR CELLUR LTD.,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. VILLAGE OFFICER,
... Respondent
2. VILLAGE OFFICER, NADAKUTHAZHA,
3. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
4. VADAKARA MUNCIPALITY REPRESENTED BY
5. KIZHAKKOTH GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
6. SECRETARY, LOCAL ADMINISTRATION
For Petitioner :SRI.P.SATHISAN
For Respondent :SRI.P.J.MATHEW
The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
Dated :03/04/2007
O R D E R
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J.
W.P.(C) No.10810 of 2007 J
Dated this the 3rd day of April, 2007.
JUDGMENT
A mobile telephone company has filed this writ petition seeking quashment of Ext.P5 stop memo and Ext.P6 prohibitory order issued by the Village Officer.
2. It is seen from Exts.P5 and P6 that they have been issued on the basis of the complaints submitted by the neighbouring public before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Kozhikode that the installation and energisation of the Mobile Tower which is proposed by the petitioner will cause serious health hazards because of the radiation emanating from the towers. Exts.P3 and P4 will show that the Local Authorities [Vatakara Municipal Council and W.P.(C) No.10810 of 2007 Kizhakkoth Grama Panchayat] have issued necessary permits to the petitioner company. The issue in this writ petition, in my opinion, is covered by the judgment of the Division Bench in Reliance Infocom Ltd v. Chemanchery Grama Panchayat {2006(4) K.L.T. 695}, in which it is stated that the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board has submitted an affidavit before the Bombay High Court in a similar case and the stand taken by the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board is that the radiation emanated by the Mobile Telephone Towers is practically nil when compared with radiation from Radio Towers. The World Health Organisation also is of the same opinion. The Division Bench in Reliance Infocom's case has actually took into account the affidavit W.P.(C) No.10810 of 2007 submitted by the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board.
3. I had occasion to read the report of the World Health Organisation in similar cases. It has, therefore, to be found that the apprehension of the local public that there will be serious health hazards on account of the installation and energisation of the B.T.S by the petitioner is irrational. Following the principles laid down by the Division Bench in Reliance Infocom's case, this writ petition will stand allowed. Exts.P5 and P6 are quashed. Sd/- (PIUS C. KURIAKOSE)
JUDGE
sk/ //true copy// P.S. To Judge
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J.
W.P.(C) No.10810 of 2007 J
JUDGMENT
3rd March, 2007.
