Granting Bail Does Not Shield Foreign Nationals from Executive Action on Visa Violations: Delhi High Court Contempt Jurisdiction Cannot Be Misused to Resolve Substantive Disputes or Replace Execution Mechanisms: P&H High Court Eviction Proceedings Must Follow Principles of Natural Justice: Telangana High Court Quashes Eviction Order under Senior Citizens Act Limitation Law | Sufficient Cause Cannot Be Liberally Interpreted If Negligence or Inaction Is Apparent: Gujarat High Court Mere Pendency of Lease Renewal Requests Does Not Constitute Bona Fide Dispute: Calcutta High Court Upholds Eviction Proceedings Under Public Premises Act CGST | Declaratory Nature of Safari Retreats Ruling Mandates Reassessment of Input Tax Credit Claims: Kerala High Court Changing Rules of the Game Mid-Way Violates Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution: Rajasthan High Court Disapproval of a Relationship Does Not Constitute Abetment of Suicide Without Direct Instigation or Mens Rea: Supreme Court Limitation Period Under Section 166(3) of the Motor Vehicle Act Cannot Defeat Victim’s Right to Compensation: Gujarat High Court Maintenance To Wife Cannot Be a Precondition for Bail: Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Section 438 CrPC Court Cannot Rewrite Contract When Vendor Lacks Ownership of the Property: Calcutta High Court Dismisses Appeal for Specific Performance Royalty Can Be Levied on Minor Minerals Like Brick Earth, Irrespective of Land Ownership: Supreme Court Bail in Heinous Crimes Must Be Granted with Adequate Reasons and Judicial Scrutiny: Supreme Court Judicial Review in Disciplinary Cases Is Limited to Fairness, Not Reappreciation of Evidence: Supreme Court Prolonged Consensual Relationship Cannot Be Criminalized as Rape on False Promise of Marriage: Madras High Court No Interference in Judgments Without Perversity or Legal Error Under Section 100 CPC: Andhra Pradesh HC

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"]

Similar News