Thursday, April 25, 2024
154,225FansLike
654,155FollowersFollow
0SubscribersSubscribe

Madhya Pradesh HC asks local authority to act on complaint against mobile tower in densely populated area

The PIL sought actions as people experience sleep disorders, fatigue, headache, memory loss, depression, hearing problems, joint pains, skin diseases etc.

The Jabalpur bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court has recently disposed of a PIL with the direction to the competent authority/urban local body to take action on the complaint against mobile tower at the public site in 15 days.

The division bench of Chief Justice Mohammad Rafiq and Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla passed this direction in the PIL filed by Mahesh Shewani through advocate Devendra Kumar Tripathi.

The PIL had sought direction from the High Court to take action on his complaints against the installation of mobile tower in dense and crowded localities as people experience sleep disorders, fatigue, headache, memory loss, depression, hearing problems, joint pains, skin diseases etc.

Brahmadatt Singh, counsel for the State, pointed out that the local bodies have framed the rules called MP Nagar Palika (Installation of Temporary Tower/Structure for Cellular Mobile Phone Service) Rules, 2012 and under the said Rules, the mechanism for redressal of the grievance has been provided. He placed reliance on the order dated December 1, 2017, passed in W.P. No.20741/2017 (Smt. Maya Devi Verma Vs. State of M.P. and others ) passed by the Single Bench of the MP High Court.

Read Also: Sustainable Development in a Pandemic

“We deem it proper to dispose of the writ petition by granting liberty to the petitioner to approach to the competent authority/Urban Local Body for raising his grievance regarding the installation of the tower. The said objection/representation of the petitioner shall be considered and decided by the competent authority within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the objection/representation after hearing the respondent No.6-mobile company, in accordance with the law. It is made clear that we have not examined the case of the petitioner on merit,” the Court ordered while disposing of the PIL.

spot_img

News Update