Asokendra Nath Das vs State Of West Bengal & Ors.

Learned counsel for the petitioner moves this writ petition on notice. He has with him affidavit of service showing despatch to all the private

respondents and he has also with him acknowledgement cards showing service on one of the private respondents being respondent No.4 (Reliance

Communications Limited).

The affidavit of service filed today shows service on the Municipal Corporation, the State of West Bengal as also the ‘refused service’ on the

other nonState respondents. Mr. Bhattacharyya, learned advocate appears for the Chandernagore Municipal Corporation. Let the affidavit of service

be kept on record. Mr. Shaw is given liberty to file a further affidavit disclosing the acknowledgement due cards.

I hold the writ petition ready as regards service. The writ petitioner says that he is aggrieved by the conduct of the Chandernagore Municipal

Corporation. This conduct, according to him, comprised allowing installation of a second mobile tower on the premise owned by the private

respondents and at their instance.

He says that the requirements published by the Department of Tele Communication as also the respondent No. 1 through its department of

environment have been blatantly violated at least in respect of installation of multiple station based antennas; however, the representation made by his

client which appears at page ‘47’ of the writ petition does not completely disclose his grievances or the statutory provisions which he relies.

Accordingly, subject to the filing of the above affidavit showing service on the respondent No. 4, the writ petition is disposed of with the following

directions:-

If the writ petitioner makes a comprehensive representation disclosing all his grievances and statutory provisions against the installation of the second

mobile tower at the same premises and how this affects him, Mr. Bhattacharyya’s client shall consider and dispose of the representation by a

speaking order after giving all concerned parties including the respondents in the writ petition as also the writ petitioner and/or their respective

representatives an adequate opportunity of being heard.

The question of whether or not the mobile tower should be allowed to continue shall naturally be decided by the Municipal Corporation concerned in

terms of its decision. I have not gone into the merits of the matter. The said Municipal Corporation is at liberty to decide the matter in its own way so

long it is in accordance with law.

The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date the application/comprehensive representation is made by Mr.

Shaw’s client. Since no affidavit has been called for, the allegations contained in the writ petition are not admitted. The writ petition is thus

disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.