M/S.Indus Towers Ltd., Rep. v. The Assistant Director
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 20/12/2022 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR Indus Towers Ltd rep. By its Authorised Signatory Mr.S.Vijay Raj Srivari Shrimath, III and IV Floors No.1045 Avinashi Road Coimbaatore 641 018.
...
Petitioner Vs
1. The Assistant Director (Panchayats) Tirupur District.
2. The President Ganapathipalayam Panchayat Ganapathipalayam, Chinnyampalayam Post Kunathur Tirupur District 638 103.
...
Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records of the second respondent in Notice dated 26/3/2012 seeking to levy fee concerning the business activity of the petitioner and also locking of the premises at S.No.81/1 of Ganapathipalayam Panchayat, Chinnyampalayam Post, Kunathur, Tirupur District 638 103, where the petitioner has Page No:1/4
established the Telecom tower and to quash the said Notice being in derogation of law and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the operation of the telecom tower of the petitioner in S.No.81/1 of Ganapathipalayam Panchayat, Chinnyampalayam Post, Kunathur, Tirupur District 638 103.
For Petitioner ...
Mr.P.Elayaraj Kumar for M/s.Ramalingam & Associates For respondents ...
Mr.S.Rajesh Government Advocate for R.1 No appearance for R.2.
- - - - -
O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed to quash the Notice, dated 26/3/2012 issued by the second respondent and consequently, direct the respondents not to interfere with the operation of the telecom tower of the petitioner, in S.No.81/1 of Ganapathipalayam Panchayat, Chinnyampalayam Post, Kunathur, Tirupur District 638 103.
2. The grievance of the petitioner is that for erecting the cell phone towers, the second respondent, demanded a sum of Rs.24,000/- per annum. Challenging the same, present writ petition has been filed praying for the relief as stated therein.
Page No:2/4
3. Heard Mr.P.Elayaraj Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.Rajesh, Government Advocate for the first respondent. There is no appearance on behalf of the second respondent.
4. In the counter filed by the respondents, at paragraph 8, it is stated that whenever, the petitioner re-starts his business relating to operation of telecom tower within the second respondent Panchayat area, second respondent will not ask for necessary licence for conducting the business of the petitioner.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the first respondent submitted that they will not claim any amount, as mentioned in the impugned order.
6. Statement of the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent, is recorded. Since nothing survives for further adjudication, this writ petition is closed. No costs.
20/12/2022 Index : Yes / No Internet: Yes Speaking/non speaking order mvs.
Page No:3/4
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J mvs.
To
1. The District Collector Office of the District Collector Erode District Erode 638 011.
2. The Assistant Director of Panchayats Rural Development Erode District.
3. The Block Development Officer (Village Panchayats) Mudkkurichi Erode District.
4. The President Nanjai Uthukuli Village Panchayat Erode 638 104.
W.P.No.15819 of 2015 20/12/2022 Page No:4/4