Sunday, November 3, 2024
154,225FansLike
654,155FollowersFollow
0SubscribersSubscribe

Uttarakhand High Court refuses to move mobile tower in Dehradun, tells petitioner to approach authorities

Samay Sharma filed the petition claiming the adverse effects of the Mobile Tower installation on people of society, and the children who attend Aaganwadi Campus.

The Uttarakhand High Court on Friday refused to issue orders to shift a mobile tower to another place, saying,

“It is neither the responsibility nor the duty of this Court to run the administration. Where a mobile tower should be erected is a decision that needs to be taken by the respondents themselves.”

The petitioner, Samay Sharma, was aggrieved by the fact that the Indus Towers Ltd. (respondent no. 5) is permitted to erect a mobile tower in Aaganwadi Campus, Shivlok Colony, Ramnagar, Raipur, Dehradun, and approached the High Court.

The counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the mobile tower may adversely affect, not only the children, who will be attending the Aaganwadi Campus, but also others, who reside in the residential area of the colony, the state of Uttarakhand, District Magistrate, Dehradun, Dehradun Smart City Limited, Mussoorie Dehradun Development Authority and Nagar Nigam, Dehradun should be directed to move the mobile tower to some other place.

While considering the submission of the petitioner’s counsel, the Court asked the counsel for the petitioner, if there is any bar, in the law, which prevents a mobile tower from being erected and which have been permitted by the respondents to be erected? To this query, the counsel has frankly conceded that there is no bar in the law.

Therefore, the Court ordered, “No mandamus can be issued to the respondents for shifting the mobile tower to another place”, observing that “It is neither the responsibility, nor the duty of this Court to run the administration.”

Also Read: Delhi High Court allows spas, wellness clinics to re-open after lockdown

The Court while disposing the PIL states,

“At best, if the petitioner were to file a representation before the respondent nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 & 6, they are directed to decide the representation, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, and after hearing all his grievances with regard to the erection of the Tower, and shall pass a reasoned order thereafter. Such exercise shall be carried out by the said respondents within three weeks, after receiving of the representation to be filed by the petitioner.”

spot_img

News Update