Shaffique, J.

1. These writ petitions, except W.P(C) No. 6675/2014, are filed for a direction to provide adequate police protection for putting up mobile telecommunication towers (hereinafter referred as 'MT Towers') for facilitating mobile telecommunication services. W.P(C) No. 6675/2014 is filed by a private party, who is a resident in a location where M.T. Tower is proposed to be installed. He seeks for a direction to the Kerala State Pollution Control Board and Shornur Municipality to take effective measures to stop erection of M.T. Tower. Since the issues involved in these writ petitions are substantially the same, these writ petitions are decided by a common judgment.

2. Some of the petitioners are Telecommunication service providers who have valid license from the Ministry of Communications and IT Department, Government of India. Some of the petitioners are companies involved in the business of providing infrastructural development and construction of MT Towers for Telecommunication service providers who have valid license from the Ministry. They have taken contracts from mobile service providers to put up MT Towers after acquiring land either by way of purchase or by way of lease, license etc. In W.P(C) No. 3297/2014, the petitioner is a contractor of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited.

3. The petitioners claim to have obtained necessary building permit from the local authority. Once MT Tower is constructed, the same is utilised by the service providers to instal necessary equipments for the purpose of Telecommunication services and other permissible uses.

4. Common contention raised by the petitioners is that several persons in the locality, who are party respondents in these writ petitions, have physically obstructed construction of the MT Tower alleging either health hazard or nearness to their residential or commercial buildings. Predominantly, complaint is regarding the health hazard that may be caused due to electromagnetic radiation (for short 'EMR') when the MT Tower becomes operational. They also allege nuisance on account of the pollution caused by operation of diesel generator sets and other activities on account of the radiation that could be caused while operating the MT Tower.

5. It is contended on behalf of the petitioners that the issue relating to the health hazard is no longer res integra on account of the judgment of this Court in Essar Telecom Infrastructure v. C.I. of Police, Angamaly, [2010(2) KLT 762 (FB)] and Essar Telecom Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Kerala, [2011 (2) KLT 516].

6. It is pointed out that Kerala Municipality Building Rules, 1999 (for short 'KMBR') framed under the Kerala Municipalities Act provides a separate Chapter 19 for giving permission in respect of telecommunication tower which inter alia includes towers for mobile service communication as well. Similarly, the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, 2011 (for short KPBR) framed under the provisions of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 has also provided Chapter 20 specifying the manner in which and conditions under which permission could be granted for installing telecommunication tower. It is argued that all the petitioners have valid building permit from the local authority under the provisions of the KMBR or KPBR depending upon the situs of the construction.

7. When the petitioners have complied with the norms prescribed under the above said statutory provisions and have obtained such building permits, without challenging the said permits by invoking the statutory remedy of filing an appeal, the party respondents cannot take law into their own hands and prevent construction of the MT Towers.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioners have further submitted that the guidelines issued by the Government from time to time, which is produced in W.P(C) No. 19527/2014, does not run contrary to their demand and even assuming that the party respondents has any complaint regarding installation of MT Towers they have to approach s