IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 09.03.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

W.P. No.1862 of 2020

Indus Towers Limited,

Rep. by its Authorized Signatory,

Mr.S.Prasanna,

No.5, ESPEE IT PARK,

5^th Floor, Jawaharlal Nehru Road,

Ekkatuthangal,

Chennai – 600 097.

... Petitioner

Vs

1. The Secretary to the Government,

Information Technology Department,

Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.

2. The District Collector,

Erode District.

3. The District Revenue Officer,

Erode District.

... Respondents

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India praying for the issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing

the second respondent to permit the erection and installation of

the mobile phone tower of the petitioner at the premises being

vacant land measuring about 2400 sq. ft. situated at Ward No.15,

comprised in S.F.No.16, Resurvey No.28/20, Mettuaasuvamalayam

Village, Erode Taluk, Erode District in accordance with the

petitioner's representation dated 09.10.2019.

For petitioner

...

Mr.Harikrishnan,

for Mr.S.Anil Sandeep

For Respondents 1 & 2

...

Mr.V.Shanmuga Sundar,

Special Government Pleader

For Respondent 3

...

Ms.A.Sri Jayanthi,

Special Government Pleader

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed has been filed for a

mandamus seeking for a direction to the second respondent to

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

permit the erection and installation of the mobile phone tower

at the premises measuring about 2400 sq. ft. of vacant land

situated and comprised in Ward No.15, comprised in S.F.No.16,

Resurvey No.28/20, Mettuaasuvamalayam Village, Erode Taluk,

Erode District based on the petitioner's representation dated

09.10.2019.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is a

company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 and

engaged in the business of establishing and maintaining

telecommunication infrastructure. According to the petitioner,

they sought permission from the second respondent for

installation of mobile phone tower at the aforementioned

property by their representation dated 09.10.2019. According to

the petitioner, they have complied with all the requirements of

the second respondent by producing all the documents required by

them. However, it is their case that instead of granting

permission, the second respondent has requested the petitioner

to furnish additional documents. According to the petitioner,

since the said representation has not been considered till date,

the petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of

the Constitution of India.

3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent

before this Court stating that the residents of the area where

the mobile phone tower is proposed to be located are objecting

the said installation. It is also stated that a copy of type

test certificate issued by ARAI for running DG sets as per the

provisions of Environment Protection Act and Noise and Pollution

(Regulation & Control) Rules, 2000, a copy of clearance from the

Fire Safety Department and a copy of Structural Stability

Certificate of the Building will also have to be produced.

4. Heard Mr.Hari Krishnan, learned counsel representing

Mr.S.Anil Sandeep, learned counsel for the petitioner,

Mr.V.Shanmuga Sundar, learned Special Government Pleader for the

respondents 1 and 2 and Ms.A.Sri Jayanthi, learned Special

Government Pleader for the third respondent.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the

petitioner has submitted all the documents required by the

respondents for the purpose of getting permission for

installation of the mobile phone tower including the documents

mentioned in the counter affidavit filed by the respondent.

6. Ms.A.Sri Jayanthi, learned Special Government Pleader for

the third respondent would submit