Friday, October 29, 2010

PROCEDURE TO OPPOSE ERECTION OF MOBILE TOWERS

Milind Bembalkar,

‘Parijat’, Guru Krupa Colony,
Ambejogai Road, Latur 413531

Date: 22.1.2010

PROCEDURE TO OPPOSE ERECTION OF MOBILE TOWERS :



The application complaining about mobile tower may be sent to the concerned Chief Executive Officer of the Municipality, Concerned Municipal Commissioner, or Sarpanch, Tahsildar, Grampanchayat and District Collector Office respectively of the area concerned.

The copies of the complaint application may please be forwarded to :

• Ward Officer of the area.

• Circle Office of the Mahavitaran Karyalaya (Electricity Office) of the area.

• The Principal Secretary-1, Urban Development Department, 4th floor, Mantralaya, Madam Cama Road, Mantralaya, Mumbai 400 032.

• District Office of the Environment Control Board.

• Officer-inCharge of the local police station.

THE RULES AND LAWS RELATING TO MOBILE TOWERS :

1. The erection of a mobile tower on a residential building violates the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which deals with the right of citizen to live in peace.

2. Further it is binding on the concerned mobile companies want to erect mobile tower, to ensure that 1.5 times square area in relation to the height of the tower, is free from all safety hazards . (Reference Pune Municipal Corporation Circular dated 26.11.2007, agenda No. 6/207, dated 27.11.2007 and Order No. TPS 1806 dated 7.8.2007 of UDD, Government of Maharashtra, Mantralaya, Mumbai).

Illustration:

If the height of the tower is 120 feet (approximately 12 floors of the building), then 1.5 times square area means 120 x 1.5 = 180 square feet area. The concerned agency is under obligation to obtain NOC from the people residing in 180 square feet area before erecting the mobile tower.

3. The mobile towers erected without permission from local bodies (Gram Panchayat, Municipality or Municipal Corporation etc.) are illegal.

Reference: Writ Petition No. 7396 of 2008, Vodafone Essar Ltd. V/s State of Maharashtra & Ors., High Court, Mumbai. Coram : Bilal Kazi & J. H. Bhatia J.J. dated 12.11.2008.

The Supreme Court of India confirmed the decision of Mumbi High Court and disposed off the Special Leave Petition (SLP)(Civil) No. 27480 of 2008, Vodafone Essar Ltd. V/s State of Maharashtra dated 28.11.2008.

4. It is binding on the mobile companies to strictly follow the rules & regulations of local bodies and state government (Reference : Letter No. K-19012/1/RT/2009-CFA dated 18.5.2009 of Ministry of Transporattion, Sanchar Bhavan, New Delhi).

5. A committee under the chairmanship of Dr. N. K. Ganguly (Director General, Indian Council of Medical Research, New Delhi) to study :

(a) How to avoid health hazards being caused due to radiations from mobile towers,

(b) What measures should be taken to study and conduct research in the matter,

Was appointed by the Government of India, Ministry of Health & Welfare, New Delhi as per the orders of the Supreme Court of India in Writ Petition No. 2112 of 2004, Shri Farukh Contractor V/s Government of India).

The I.C.M.R., New Delhi submitted its report to the Health Ministry, government of India on 29th March 2006. It is laid down in the said report that

a. That, if the height of the mobile tower is 36 meters (120 feet or equal to 12 storied building approximately), then the people moving/commuting below the tower will not suffer from radiations but those coming in close vicinity of the tower may suffer.

b. It is further submitted in the report that complaints about insufficient sleep and proper rest, memory or hearing disorders etc. have been received from the people residing and/or working in the vicinity of mobile towers and that there is a need to conduct research in the matter, for which, sufficient funds should be made available.

For want of adequate research in the matter Dr. Ganguly has advised to take precautionary measures. In short, if there is a possibility of causing irreversible loss by some act or decision, then in the absence of any scientific evidence, the liability to give evidence shall lie upon the person doing the act or taking the decision and that the responsibility of taking preventive measures shall also lie on such person and that the person causing pollution (Radiation, e-smog, Radio Frequency Radiation) will be liable to pay the compensation (Reference : Vellor Citizen Forum V/s Government of India, 1996(5) S.S.C.P.P. 246, para 65 and Andhra Pradesh Pollution Board V/s Professor M. V. Naidu 1999(2) S.S.C. 718).

On the basis of ‘precautionary’ principle, the court in France ordered and caused to remove the mobile tower erected on a building by the Boigus mobile company on 6th March 2009, because the concerned mobile company failed to furnish evidence tp prove that the mobile tower is free from all hazards and safe.

It is observed that the courts through out the world have adopted the principle of ‘Precautionary Measures’ in the cases of mobile towers. The Courts & Scientists are always in search of truth but the only difference between them is that the findings of the scientists may change, the finding may be uncertain due to inadequate information and therefore, proper analysis of the subject matter is not possible. On the other hand the courts are required to issue orders and settle the disputes by taking into consideration the overall welfare of the public in general.

6. The people residing in the vicinity of mobile towers should always incorporate the indemnity term regarding health and accident, fire due to short circuit, tower collapse etc. and damages, in the agreement with mobile companies erecting the mobile towers.

The people are advised to think seriously and take appropriate decision keeping in mind their own health.

Milind Bembalkar


094226-56058 / bemsons@yahoo.com

1 comment:

  1. it is informative and guiding others to fight the menace.

    ReplyDelete