- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29094 WP No. 5038 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 5038 OF 2025 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. M/S. ASCEND TELECOM INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.37-2 PLOT NO.332, MANI MANSION DEFENCE COLONY, SAINIKPURI SIKANDRABAD, ANDRAPRADESH. BRANCH OFFICE AT SANGEETHA TOWER NO.3, 80 FEET ROAD INDIRA NAGAR BANGALORE-560 038. REPRESENTED BY ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER S. RAVI SHETTY, S/O SRI. SUBBRAMANYA SHETTI. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. B.J.MAHESH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001 REP. BY CHIEF SECRETARY. Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29094 WP No. 5038 of 2025 2. THE PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT OFFICER VILLAGE PANCHAYATH DARGAJOGIHALLI VILLAGE PANCHAYATH DODDABALLAPURA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-561 203. 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER DODDABALLAPURA RURAL POLICE STATION DODDABALLAPURA-561 203. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SPOORTHI V., HCGP FOR R1 & R3; SRI. M.S.DEVARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE RESOLUTION DATED 23-12-2024 BY THE DARGAJOGIHALLI VILLAGE PANCHAYATH, IN SO FOR AS DECISION TO WITHHOLD THE DEEMED APPROVAL GRANTED TO THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNEXURE-J, COMMUNICATED TO THE PETITIONER ON 24.01.2025, CONSEQUENTLY PERMIT THE PETITIONER TO PROCEED WITH THE WORK OF ESTABLISHMENT OF MOBILE TELECOMMUNICATION TOWER IN THE PETITION SCHEDULE PROPERTY AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29094 WP No. 5038 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER The petitioner is a company, which is in the business of erecting mobile telecommunication towers and after obtaining permission in accordance with law has erected one such tower in the writ petition schedule premises. Thereafter, respondent No.2 only on the ground that certain villagers objected to the erection of a tower because it is hazardous to the health of persons living in the area, has passed the impugned resolution, wherein, it has been decided to pursue the cancellation of the permission granted in favour of the petitioner to erect such tower (Annexure-J to the writ petition). Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. 2. The case of the petitioner is that mobile telecommunication tower has to be erected in a place where people are residing and it has been done throughout the world. It is further submitted that it does not cause any health hazard which requires prohibition of the same. It is also submitted that law does not bar erection of such a tower in an area which is inhabited by human beings. It is contended that the petitioner - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29094 WP No. 5038 of 2025 has erected such tower after obtaining all the necessary permissions required in law. It is also submitted that permission so granted cannot be withdrawn only on the ground that people in the locality have objected to it. The petitioner also contends that the impugned order has been passed unilaterally without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. On the ground of violation of principles of natural justice, it is prayed that the writ petition be allowed. 3. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that the petitioner is having an alternative and efficacious remedy under Section 269(1) of the Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (for short 'the Act'). On the said ground, it is prayed that the writ petition be dismissed. 4. It is true that the petitioner is having an alternative and efficacious remedy under Section 269(1) of the Act. However, it is not in dispute that the impugned resolution withdrawing the permission granted to the petitioner has been passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29094 WP No. 5038 of 2025 5. For the said reason, the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed; ii. The impugned resolution dated 23.12.2024 passed by respondent No.2 (vide Annexure-J to the writ petition) is hereby set aside; iii. The matter is remanded back to respondent No.2 to hear the petitioner and pass an appropriate order afresh; iv. The petitioner shall appear before respondent No.2 on 12.08.2025 at 11.00 a.m; v. Respondent No.2 shall consider the case of the petitioner within a period of eight weeks thereafter in accordance with law. SD/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE PGG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 47