The cancellation of a No Objection Certificate for a mobile tower without due process, specifically without a hearing, contravenes principles of natural justice and lacks legal basis, as complaints against it were unsubstantiated.

JUDGMENT :

Advait M. Sethna J.

1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the following substantive reliefs :-

“[A] That this Honourable Court be pleased to issue a writ mandamus or writ certiorari or writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ direction or order under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950, quashing and setting aside the impugned Resolution No. 3 passed by the Respondent no. 1, Village Gram panchayat Tanang, Taluka - Miraj, District - Sangali dated 08.08.2024 thereby cancelled the No Objection Certificate (NOC) and stopped the installation work of mobile tower of the petitioner at Gat No. 300/1, Tanang, Taluka- Miraj, District –

Sangli.

[B] That this Honourable Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ direction or order under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950, be pleased to direct the Respondent No. 1 - Gram panchayat, their employees, their agent, or any other person claiming through the Respondent No.l not to obstruct the installation of the mobile tower of the Petitioner - Company at Gat No. 300/1, Tanang, Taluka - Miraj, District - Sangli and be pleased to direct them to operate the allow the Petitioner to operate the mobile tower without any obstruction and hindrance by Respondent - Gram panchayat or by residents of the village or any other person claiming through the Gram panchayat.”

2. We have heard Mr. Anil Anturkr, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Tejas Dande, for respondent nos. 1 to 3 and with their assistance we have perused the record.

3. The challenge in this petition is to a resolution no. 3 dated 8 August 2024 passed by the Gramsabha, Grampanchayat of Tanang, Taluka Miraj, Dist. Sangli, Kolhapur. (“Impugned Resolution”). By such resolution, the No Objection Certificate (“NOC”) granted to the petitioner for installing the mobile tower on the subject land owned by petitioner no. 2 is cancelled by which, the petitioner is aggrieved and hence approached this Court by way of this writ petition. We are called upon to examine the validity and legality of the impugned resolution in light of the legal position as applicable.

4. At the very outset, we are reminded of the following observations of Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul (as His Lordship then was) in ( K.R. Ramaswamy vs. Government of India , 2015 SCC OnLine Mad 5858 when his Lordship observed :-

1 “To Be Or Not To Be” or rather “to have mobile phone towers or not to have mobile phone towers”, is the question

2. Petitioners seek regulations qua where the mobile phone towers should be installed on account of ill-effects of technology on human beings. But, none of the petitioners have any conclusive material to show such ill-effects of radiation from the mobile phone towers. The apprehension arises on account of what is stated to be the different studies to the effect that the existence of mobile phone towers may possibly amount to health hazards. The moot point is, though, whether there are actually any health hazard on account of mobile phone towers, and if so, what are the precautions necessary.”

5. The necessary facts for adjudication are as under :-

6. The petitioner no. 2 is the owner of land bearing survey no. 300/1 situated at village – Tanang who has agreed to install the mobile tower of petitioner no. 1 on the said land. The petitioner no. 1 is the registered infrastructure provider for the mobile network having registration granted by the Department of Telecommunication (DOT) and hav