Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 29798 (RAJ)

GRAM PANCHAYAT KAMOLAR v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CW/14829/2024 · 2025-05-20

Anoop Kumar Dhand

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:21318] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14829/2024 Gram Panchayat Kamolar, Panchayat Samiti Sangod, District Kota (Rajasthan) Through Sarpanch, Megha Gautam. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through District Collector, Kota (Rajasthan), Collectorate Campus, Nayapura, Kota. 2. Devraj Singh S/o Shri Rajendra Singh, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Village And Post Kamolar, Tehsil Sangod, District Kota (Rajasthan) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deepak Mittal For Respondent(s) : Ms. Gunjan Chawla Mr. Harshit Parahsar for Mr. Neeraj Batra-G.C. Mr. Manish Kumar Sharma JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 20/05/2025 1. By way of filing this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking directions against the respondents to remove the installed mobile tower. 2. It has been apprised at Bar that the matter is subjudice before the Committee headed by District Collector, Kota, since July, 2024. 3. Counsel submits that till date, the representation submitted by the petitioner has not been decided by the said Committee, so appropriate directions be issued to the Committee concerned to decide the representation expeditiously within a time frame. [2025:RJ-JP:21318] (2 of 2) [CW-14829/2024] 4. In the considered opinion of this Court, installation of mobile tower is governed by the order dated 06.02.2017 issued by the State Government. In the said order dated 06.02.2017, Clause 15(4) clearly provides that the District Telecom Committee (DTC) under the Chairmanship of District Collector concerned shall deal with the issue related to telecom infrastructure including public grievance for installation of tower etc. 5. Since the petitioner has already approached the authority concerned by way of filing a representation for redressal of his grievance but inspite of passing of a considerable time, till date, the said representation filed by the petitioner has not been decided. 6. Considering the above limited prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner, the instant writ petition stands disposed of with direction to the Chairperson of the Committee to decide the representation (pending, if any), strictly in accordance with law, after providing opportunity of hearing to all the respective parties, expeditiously as early as possible, not beyond the period of three month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 7. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/101