IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27th DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NOS.49973 OF 2015 (GM-RES) AND WRIT PETITION NOS.50381-391 OF 2015 BETWEEN:
1. MR RAMAKRISHNA ADAPPA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, S/O. LATE CHIKKAYYA ADAPPA, FLAT NO.102, ABHIMAN MANSION, BEJAI CHURCH ROAD, MANGALURU-575 004.
2. DR. B.M. VENKATESH AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, S/O. LATE B.T. MANJAPPA GOWDA, FLAT NO.705, ABHIMAN MANSION, BEJAI CHURCH ROAD, MANGALURU-575 004.
3. DR. HARISH JOSHY AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, S/O. S. SHANKARNARAYANA JOSHI, FLAT NO.701, ABHIMAN MANSION, BEJAI CHURCH ROAD, MANGALURU-575 004.
4. DR. ARUN KUDVA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, S/O. DR. M.A. R. KUDVA, FLAT NO.104, ABHIMAN MANSION, BEJAI CHURCH ROAD, MANGALURU-575 004.
5. MR. HARISHCHANDRA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, S/O. THIMMAPPA SHETTY, FLAT NO. 703, ABHIMAN MANSION, BEJAI CHURCH ROAD, MANGALURU-575 004.
6. DR. SANTHOSH SHENOY AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, S/O. V. JANARDHANA SHENOY, FLAT NO.401, ABHIMAN MANSION, BEJAI CHURCH ROAD, MANGALURU-575 004.
7. MR. SRINIVAS H AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, S/O. LATE DURGA, FLAT NO.405, ABHIMAN MANSION, BEJAI CHURCH ROAD, MANGALURU-575 004.
8. MR. RAJASHEKAR BUDALE AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, S/O. LATE AITHAPPA BUDALE, FLAT NO.503, ABHIMAN MANSION, BEJAI CHURCH ROAD, MANGALURU-575 004.
9. MR. K. ANANTH KAMATH AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, S/O. K. MADHAVA KAMATH, "VAIKUNTAM" KODIALGUTHU EAST, BEJAI, MANGALURU-575 004.
10. MR. JAYAPRAKASH PATTE AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, S/O. GANAPATHI ACHAR PATTE, "MANISHA" NEAR MERCURY APARTMENT, BEJAI CHURCH ROAD, BEJAI, MANGALURU-575 004.
11. MR. N. BALACHANDRA RAO AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, S/O. N. SUBBA ROA, "ASHIRVAD", BEJAI CHURCH ROAD, BEJAI, MANGALURU-575 004.
12. MRS. NALINI U. SHETTY AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, W/O. LATE UGGAPPA SHETTY, AMRITHA HOUSE, BEJAI CHURCH ROAD, BEJAI, MANGALURU-575 004.
… PETITIONERS (BY SRI.O.SHIVARAMA BHAT, ADV.) AND:
1. TELECOM REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA REP BY ITS MINISTRY OF TELECOM, MAHANAGAR, DOORSANCHAR BHAWAN JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU MARG NEW DELHI-110 002 REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN 2. WIRELESS T.T. INFO SERVICES LTD. A PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY, INCORPORATED UNDER THE INDIAN COMPANIES ACT, REGISTERED OFFICE AT 5TH FLOOR, KLK ESTATE, FATEB MAIDAN ROAD, HYDERABAD-500 001, A.P. REP BY ITS DIRECTOR 3. TATA TELE SERVICES LTD. A-26, GROUND FLOOR, PREMCO HOUSE, STREE-3, ANDHERI EAST, MUMBAI-400093, REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR.
4. MRS. NITA V. SHEREKKAR W/O. VINOD SHEREKKAR, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, SHILPA HOUSE, NO.3/33-2887, BEJAI CHURCH ROAD, MANGALURU-575 004.
… RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.S.R.DODAWAD, ADV. FOR R-1; SRI. B.N.JAYADEVA, ADV. FOR R-3;
SRI G.RAVISHANKAR SHASTRY, ADV. FOR R-4; V/O DATED:05.02.2019, NOTICE TO R-2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-1 TO R-3 CONSIDER THE PRAYER OF THE PETITIONER MADE IN THEIR REGISTERED NOTICE DATED:06.08.2015 VIDE ANNEXURE-N AND TO REMOVE OR TO SHIFT MOBILE TOWER INSTALLED IN THE BUILDING OF KODIALBAIL VILLAGE, BEJAI CHURCH ROAD, MANGALURU-575 004 TO ANY OTHER PLACE AS MENTIONED IN THE GUIDELINES AND ETC.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Sri. O. Shivarama Bhat, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Sri. S. R. Dodawad, learned counsel for respondent No.1.
Sri. B. N. Jayadeva, learned counsel for respondent No.3.
Sri. G. Ravishankar Shastry, learned counsel for respondent No.4.
These petitions are admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same are heard finally.
2. In these petitions, the petitioners inter alia seek for a direction to respondent Nos.1 to 3 to consider the prayer made in their registered Notice dated 06.08.2015 vide Annexure-N and to remove or to shift mobile tower installed in the building bearing S.No.48/5B T.S.No.1570-8P1/8P2 of Kodialbail village, Bejai Church Road, Mangaluru- 575004 to any other place as mentioned in the guidelines.
3. When these matters were taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that these writ petitions may be disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to consider their registered Notice dated 06.08.2015 vide Annexure- N in accordance with law.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the registered Notice submitted by the petitioners shall be dealt with in accordance with law, if not already decided.
5. In view of the submissions made and in the facts of the case, these writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to decide the registered notice submitted by the petitioners, if not already decided, in accordance with law by a speaking order within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today.
6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
Accordingly, these writ petitions are disposed of.
sd/- JUDGE Mds/-