Non-Compliance With Rule 14 Of NDPS Rules 2022 Regarding Quantitative Test Vitiates Prosecution Case And Renders Detention Illegal: Allahabad High Court Supreme Court Directs Systematic Audit And Institutional Accountability For Safety In Public Spaces Under Article 21 Extra-Judicial Confession Made Before Police Cannot Solely Sustain Preventive Detention: Supreme Court Pre-Trial Incarceration Cannot Masquerade As Punitive Detention When Trial Is Not Imminent: Supreme Court Land Acquisition | Radial ‘Hub-And-Spoke’ Valuation Models For Contiguous Lands Are Legally Unsustainable: Supreme Court Forfeiture Of Earnest Money Deposit Is A Valid Consequence Upon Failure To Pay Balance Sale Consideration Under IBC Liquidation Process: Supreme Court Res Judicata | Suit For Specific Performance Barred If Relief Was Available In Prior Suit For Permanent Injunction And Not Claimed: Supreme Court RERA | Allottee’s Right To Seek Refund Is Absolute And Unqualified, Not Subject To Promoter’s Completion Of Project: Bombay High Court Order 1 Rule 10(2) CPC | Appellate Court Cannot Summarily Reject Addition Of Legal Heirs Based On Unproven Documents Without Reason: Calcutta High Court Order XIV Rule 5 CPC | Trial Court Must Frame Additional Issues Based On Liberty Granted By Supreme Court To Ensure Just Adjudication: Delhi High Court Mere Citation Of Wrong Provision Does Not Invalidate Order If Court Possessed Jurisdiction: Gujarat High Court Injunction Under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 CPC Cannot Be Granted Over Large Unidentified Tract Of Land Without Establishing Prima Facie Case: Himachal Pradesh High Court Section 125 CrPC | Mere Rejection Of Permanent Alimony Plea In Divorce Proceedings Does Not Bar Claim For Maintenance: Karnataka High Court Section 311 BNSS | Trial Court Has Discretion To Record Evidence In Narrative Form; Accused Cannot Insist On Question-Answer Format: Kerala High Court Section 482 CrPC | Principle Of Parity Cannot Be Invoked To Quash FIR If Allegations Against Accused Are Distinct And Substantiated: Madhya Pradesh High Court Motor Vehicles Act | Tribunal Cannot Grant 'Right Of Recovery' To Insurer Without Evidence Of Policy Violation: Orissa High Court Mere Inadequacy Of Consideration Or Illiteracy Does Not Vitiate Specific Performance Unless Exploitation Is Proved: Madras High Court Contempt Jurisdiction Cannot Be Converted Into Parallel Forum To Enforce Civil Decrees: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 18 Rule 17 CPC | Reopening Evidence At The Stage Of Arguments Without Compelling Grounds Amounts To Abuse Of Process: Telangana High Court Cannot Circumvent Bail Granted By Supreme Court: Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes PITNDPS Preventive Detention Order

No Power with Grampanchayat to Stop Mobile Tower Work After NOC Issuance - Bombay High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin

In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court declared on 20th July 2023, that a Grampanchayat, after having issued a No Objection Certificate (NOC), has no authority to then pass a resolution instructing the cessation of mobile tower construction.

The case, involving Indus Towers Ltd., Pune (Formerly, Bharti Infratel Ltd., Pune) and the Grampanchayat of Chikhalhol, Tal. Khanapur, Dist. Sangli, revolved around the legality of a resolution that had halted the erection of a mobile tower due to health concerns raised by local villagers.

“The role of the Grampanchayat in the matter of erection of mobile tower in the vicinity of the Grampanchayat... is confined to only issuing of No Objection Certificate in terms of the Government Resolution dated 11th December 2015,” noted Justices SUNIL B. SHUKRE and RAJESH S. PATIL, stating that once an NOC has been issued, the Grampanchayat “loses control over the subject of erection of mobile tower.”

The court also considered the villagers’ apprehensions about potential harmful effects of the tower’s radiation, but found these to be unfounded, citing a lack of reliable scientific evidence. They quoted a past ruling, “jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot be exercised on the basis of apprehensions, which are not rooted in facts and which are not supported by reliable scientific material.”

Consequently, the court quashed the Grampanchayat’s resolution and directed them not to obstruct the operation of the mobile tower as long as it is in accordance with the law. The ruling has important implications for the telecommunication infrastructure, affirming that after issuing an NOC, Grampanchayats cannot halt the installation of mobile towers based on non-scientific apprehensions.

Date of Decision:20th July, 2023

Indus Towers Ltd., Pune (Formerly, Bharti Infratel Ltd., Pune)  vs Grampanchayat,

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Indus_Vs_Grampanchyat_20July23_PHHC.pdf"]

Latest Legal News

  • by sayum
    30 September 2026 9:32 AM
Cannot Circumvent Bail Granted By Supreme Court: Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes PITNDPS Preventive Detention Order
  • by sayum
    30 September 2026 9:31 AM
Order 18 Rule 17 CPC | Reopening Evidence At The Stage Of Arguments Without Compelling Grounds Amounts To Abuse Of Process: Telangana High Court
  • by sayum
    30 September 2026 9:30 AM
Contempt Jurisdiction Cannot Be Converted Into Parallel Forum To Enforce Civil Decrees: Punjab & Haryana High Court
  • by sayum
    30 September 2026 9:28 AM
Mere Inadequacy Of Consideration Or Illiteracy Does Not Vitiate Specific Performance Unless Exploitation Is Proved: Madras High Court
  • by sayum
    30 September 2026 9:27 AM
Motor Vehicles Act | Tribunal Cannot Grant 'Right Of Recovery' To Insurer Without Evidence Of Policy Violation: Orissa High Court
  • by sayum
    30 September 2026 9:26 AM
Section 482 CrPC | Principle Of Parity Cannot Be Invoked To Quash FIR If Allegations Against Accused Are Distinct And Substantiated: Madhya Pradesh High Court