IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF APRIL 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.54961 OF 2018 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN:
M/s.Indus Towers Ltd., No.12, Tower-D, 7th Floor, Subramanya Arcade, Bannerghatta Road, Bengaluru – 560 029, Represented by its Authorized Signatory, Sri.Mahesh.B (By Sri. Rohith.B.J, Advocate) AND:
1. State of Karnataka Represented by its Chief Secretary, Vidhana Soudha, Bengaluru – 1.
2. The Commissioner of Police Bengaluru City, Bengaluru – 1.
3. The Station House Officer Nandini Layout Police Station, Bengaluru - 24 (By Sri. Vijay Kumar A Patil, AGA) … Petitioner … Respondents This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to direct the respondents to extend adequate protection to the petitioner’s mobile telecommunication tower being installed in the schedule property and further to extend adequate protection to the workers and assets connected with the telecommunication tower thereon as requested through their complaint dated 19.11.2018 produced at Annexure – B and etc., This Writ Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing, this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Sri.Rohith B.J, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri.Vijay Kumar A. Patil, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondents.
The petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
2. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia seeks for a direction to respondents to extend adequate protection to the petitioner’s mobile telecommunication tower being installed in the schedule property and further to extend adequate protection to the workers and assets connected with the telecommunication tower thereon as requested through their complaint dated 19.11.2018 at Annexure-B.
3. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petition be disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a representation with regard to his grievance to respondent No.3 and respondent No.3 be directed to decide the same in accordance with law.
4. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that if such representation is filed, suitable action in accordance with law shall be taken by the competent authority.
5. In view of the submissions made and in the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner that in case a fresh representation is made by him to the competent authority with regard to his grievance within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order passed today, the same shall be dealt with by the competent authority in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of receipt of such representation.
6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE dn/-