AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
8 paragraphs · 247 wordsSheel Nagu, CJ
This petition has been preferred highlighting the adverse effects of radiation and noise pollution caused by installation of a mobile tower in close vicinity to the area where the petitioner is residing.
On 04.02.2026 this Court directed the petitioner to bring on record the rules and regulations or the executive instructions in the said matter.
On 09.03.2026 this Court had passed a peremptory order to the effect that the petition would stand dismissed if the directions issued vide order dated 04.02.2026 are not complied with. However, in the said order, i.e. 09.03.2026, instead of mentioning 'without' after dismissed and before reference the word 'with' was mentioned.
That is why this case has come up for hearing today.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is not in possession of the relevant rules and regulations or the executive instructions but only prays for direction to decide his representation dated 31.12.2025 (Annexure P-9).
Though this petition has been filed without undertaking any research work but considering the limited prayer made by the petitioner, he is directed to make a representation to the competent authority, which if made within a period of 30 days along with a copy of this order, the same shall be considered and decided on its own merits by passing a speaking order and communicate the outcome to the petitioner within a period of next four weeks.
With these observations, the petition stands disposed of.