1 2026:CGHC:23711 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2769 of 2026 1 - Shivlal Sahu S/o Khomlal Sahu Aged About 53 Years Resident Of Village Aveli, Block Khairagarh, District Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan- Gandai (Chhattisgarh). ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Mantralaya Naya Raipur (C.G.). 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Department Of Electronics And Information Technology-Home, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Mantralaya Naya Raipur (C.G.). 3 - The Collector Khairagarh, District Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.). 4 - Sub Divisional Officer (Rev) Khairagarh, District Khairagarh- Chhuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.). 5 - Incharge Of Airtel Tower Company Khairagarh, District Khairagarh- Chhuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.). RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 6 - Sarpanch Gram Panchayat Aveli, Block Khairagarh, District Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.). ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinod Kumar Dewangan, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Anand Dadariya, Addl. A.G. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 15/06/2026 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “(i) That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash/set-aside the impugned order dated 28.12.2025 (Annexure P-1) passed by the respondent no. 4, in the interest of justice. (ii) That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue strictly direction to the respondent authorities to the respondent authorities to cancel the license Dangerous Mobile Wave and removing the Indus Company Mobile Tower from the residential house area at the earliest, in the interest of justice. (iii) Any other relief, which the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be granted in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Brief facts of the case, is that, the petitioner is a permanent resident of Village Aveli, Block Khairagarh, District Khairagarh- 3 Chhuikhadan-Gandai (Chhattisgarh). The grievance of the petitioner arises from the installation of an Indus mobile tower in the courtyard of one Bhagirathi Patel, situated within a residential locality and near a school. According to the petitioner, the mobile tower has been installed without obtaining a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the Gram Panchayat, without the consent of the villagers, without any resolution of the Gram Panchayat, and without obtaining permission from the competent authorities. Apprehending serious health hazards due to the radiation emitted from the mobile tower, the petitioner submitted several objections and complaints before the concerned authorities seeking its removal. As no effective action was taken, the petitioner earlier approached this Hon'ble Court by filing Writ Petition (C) No. 5278 of 2024. The said writ petition was disposed of by order dated 22.10.2024 directing the competent authority to consider and decide the petitioner's fresh detailed representation. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner submitted a representation; however, the same came to be rejected by respondent No. 4 vide the impugned order dated 28.12.2024, allegedly without proper consideration of the material available on record. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition challenging its legality and validity. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order dated 28.12.2024 is wholly arbitrary, illegal, and contrary to law, as the respondent authorities failed to consider the material 4 placed on record while rejecting the petitioner's representation despite the specific directions issued by this Hon'ble Court in the earlier writ petition. It is further submitted that the respondent company has illegally installed the mobile tower in a residential area and in close proximity to a school without obtaining the requisite No Objection Certificate from the Gram Panchayat, without the consent of the villagers, without any resolution of the Gram Panchayat, and without obtaining permission from the competent authorities. Learned counsel contends that the operation of the mobile tower poses a serious threat to the health and safety of the villagers, particularly children, due to the harmful electromagnetic radiation allegedly emitted from the tower, which is likely to cause various ailments and diseases. It is further argued that despite repeated objections and complaints submitted by the petitioner, the respondent authorities have failed to take any effective action for removal of the tower or cancellation of its licence. Therefore, it is prayed that the impugned order be set aside and the respondent authorities be directed to take appropriate action in accordance with law, including removal of the illegally installed mobile tower. 4. On the other hand learned counsel for the State opposes the same. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record, this Court proceed to examine the matter in hand. 5 6. Reliance has been placed on the judgment rendered by this Court in the matter of Reliance Infratel Limited vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others in WPC No. 5297 of 2009, wherein it is stated that installation of mobile phone towers and emission of waves by the said towers is not in any way harmful for the health and hazardous to the health of citizens. Para 10 reads as under:- "10. In view of the aforesaid analysis and going through the impugned order, it is quite vivid that there is no scientific data available on record to demonstrate that the installation of mobile phone towers and emission of waves by the said towers in any way injurious to the health of citizens. Respondent No.4 has failed to establish by placing reliable data and material showing any harmful effect on the health of human beings from such mobile transmission tower, as such learned Magistrate is absolutely unjustified in granting such application without any scientific and reliable data in that regard." 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court finds no merit in the present writ petition. The principal grievance of the petitioner is founded on the apprehension that the mobile tower installed in the residential area would adversely affect the health of the villagers due to radiation. However, the issue is no longer res integra. This Court, in Reliance Infratel Limited vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others, WPC No. 5297 of 2009, has categorically held that in the absence of any reliable scientific data or cogent material 6 establishing that emissions from mobile towers are hazardous to human health, no direction can be issued for removal of such towers merely on the basis of unfounded apprehensions. In the present case also, the petitioner has failed to place any scientific evidence or expert material to substantiate the alleged health hazards or to demonstrate that the impugned order suffers from any illegality, arbitrariness or perversity warranting interference by this Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The competent authority has already considered and rejected the petitioner's representation pursuant to the earlier directions issued by this Court, and no ground has been made out to interfere with the said decision. 8. Consequently, the writ petition, being devoid of merits, deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat