INDUS TOWERS LTD AND ANR v. GRAM PANCHAYAT TANANG AND ORS
Discusses natural justice, reasoned decisions, and statutory interpretation in the context of telecommunication infrastructure.
Court: Bombay High Court
Citation: 2025:BHC-AS:22549-DB
Decision Date: 06-06-2025
List of Laws
Constitution of India, 1949; The Indian Telegraph Act, 1885; Telecommunication Act, 2023; General Principles of Law; Indian Telegraph Right of Way Rules, 2016
- Constitution of India, 1949: The judgment discusses Article 226, noting that the writ petition was filed under it, praying for writs of mandamus or certiorari to quash the Gram Panchayat's resolution cancelling the NOC for the mobile tower installation. The court refers to Article 226 again when citing previous cases. The court also refers to Article 226 when stating that they are not inclined to exercise their jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on the basis of apprehensions which are not rooted in the facts and supported by reliable scientific material.
- The Indian Telegraph Act, 1885: The judgment mentions Section 4 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, stating that the petitioner no. 1 has a license under this section.
- Telecommunication Act, 2023: The judgment refers to the Telecommunication Act of 2023, stating that amendments in the 'Indian Telegraph Right of Way Rules, 2016' read with this Act do not mandate permission for right of way for telecommunication networks (towers). The judgment also cites Section 14(4) of the Telecommunication Act, 2023, stating that no public entity can take coercive action against a telecommunication network, except with the Central Government's permission or in cases of natural disaster or public emergency. The court finds that no such exceptional circumstances exist in this case. The judgment also refers to the Telecommunication Act, 2003, stating that the Indian Telegraph Right of Way Rules, 2016, as amended read with the Telecommunication Act, 2003 aims at promoting and facilitating the development of such infrastructure including mobile towers, across the country especially in the contemporary modern times.
- General Principles of Law: The judgment extensively discusses the principles of natural justice, specifically the 'audi alteram partem' rule (right to be heard). The court finds that the Gram Panchayat's resolution was passed without giving the petitioners an opportunity to be heard, violating this principle. The judgment also emphasizes the importance of reasoned decisions, citing Supreme Court cases that highlight the duty of statutory bodies to support their conclusions with lawful reasons. The court notes that the impugned resolution lacks reasons and is based on unsubstantiated complaints. The judgment also touches upon the principle of non-arbitrariness, stating that the Gram Panchayat's action bypassed settled norms of reasonableness and non-arbitrariness recognized in administrative jurisprudence.
- Indian Telegraph Right of Way Rules, 2016: The judgment refers to the 'Indian Telegraph Right of Way Rules, 2016', stating that they are promulgated to facilitate infrastructure development through smooth execution of digital communication projects. It also notes that amendments to these rules, read with the Telecommunication Act of 2023, do not mandate permission for right of way for telecommunication networks (towers). The judgment also refers to the Indian Telegraph Right of Way Rules, 2016, as amended read with the Telecommunication Act, 2003 aims at promoting and facilitating the development of such infrastructure including mobile towers, across the country especially in the contemporary modern times.
🔒 For Members Only