Installation of Mobile Towers in Residential Areas Case Study

A telecom infrastructure consists of electronic (active) and non-electronic infrastructure.
Electronic infrastructure includes base tower station, microwave radio equipment, switches,
antennas, transceivers for signal processing and transmission. Non-electronic infrastructure
includes tower, shelter, air-conditioning equipment, diesel electric generator, battery,
electrical supply, technical premises.
For a good quality wireless communication, Mobile Tower Base Stations ("MTBS") are an
inevitable part of the telecom infrastructure system.
While the provisions of various environmental statutes, especially the Air (Prevention and
Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 along with those of the Constitution of India have been cited
on various occasions, there still remains to be some clarity as to whether the existing
environmental statutes cover electromagnetic radiations.
India adopted the International Commission for Non Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP)
Guidelines in 2008. The Department of Telecommunications has time and again issued
advisory guidelines for state governments for issue of clearance for installation of mobile
towers including the one issued in 2013. The CPCB, as mentioned above, issued an
awareness note on mobile tower radiation and their impact on human health.
Important Judgements and Orders

 In the case of Arvind Gupta v Union of India, the National Green Tribunal ("NGT") observed
that "it is clear beyond doubt that the radiation from electromagnetic waves resulting from the
mobile towers is not explicitly covered in any of the scheduled acts to the NGT Act, 2010. In
fact, even under the NGT Act, 2010, relevant definition under provisions do not refer to the
radiation specifically." The NGT held that the issue of radiation i.e. emission of
electromagnetic waves from the towers constructed by the respective respondents does not
fall within the ambit, scope and jurisdiction vested with the NGT under the provisions of the
NGT Act with reference to the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. The Hon'ble Tribunal
has however observed that the aforesaid order only deals with the issue of jurisdiction and
that it has not recorded any finding as to whether radiation is a pollutant generally or under
any other specific law including environmental law. The NGT pointed out that it is not
dealing with the question whether the Central Government or other State Governments are
liable to be directed to frame statutory or other regulatory regime covering the construction,
its specification, sites and operation of mobile towers and other towers. The NGT also
rejected any finding as to whether radiation is above prescribed limits and the guidelines
and/or beyond them is actually injurious to human health and environment.
 The Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan in the case of Justice I.S. Israni (Retd.) v
Union of India has held that towers on hospitals and school buildings etc. should be avoided
as children and patients may be more susceptible to possible harmful effects of electro-
magnetic radiation. The case related to the erection of mobile towers in certain high-risk
areas like schools, hospitals and high-density residential areas and the validity of bye-laws
which prohibited the erection of mobile towers in such areas. The court held to be valid the
bye-laws of the State Government, made on the recommendation of the Central Government.
In the case of the densely populated residential areas, the court directed the State Government
and the local authorities to take decision on case wise basis with regard to installation of
towers in the densely populated areas in accordance with law.
 In the case of Vijay Verma v State of Himachal Pradesh, petition was filed for prohibition
from installing mobile towers on the roofs of the petitioners. In this case, the Hon'ble High
Court of Himachal Pradesh held that the main issue was whether the radiations from the
towers cause any health hazard or not. The Hon'ble High Court found out that radiation is
something that is not new and it was in existence since life began on earth. There was no
alarm with regard to possible ill-effect of the electromagnetic field (EMF) from mobile phone
towers or the mobile phones as the limit adopted by India will not have any biological effect
on the life of the people. The Hon'ble High Court observed that there was no conclusive
evidence or scientific backing that the mobile towers would cause health hazards.
 In the case of Asha Mishra v State of UP, it has been observed that "all studies indicate that
presently there appears to be no definitive scientific material or data which may warrant EMF
radiation being classified as endangering health. However the state of the research can at
present, as we have noted above, be best described as being still nebulous and tenuous. This
is perhaps the reason for research in the field being continued and ongoing. The standards
adopted in our country are stated to be more stringent than those suggested by the WHO."
 In the case of Reliance Infocomm Ltd. v Chemanchery Grama Panchayat it has been held
Right to Life enshrined under Article 21 includes all those aspects of life which make life
meaningful, complex and worth living. Development of technology has its own ill-effects on
human beings, but, at times people will have to put up with that at the cost of their
advantages.
 In the case of Cellular Operators Asso Ors vs State (Local Self Dep) Ors on 27 November,
20121 the Rajasthan High Court had held that “EMF radiations are more harmful for infants
and pregnant women; even taking of mobile is not permissible in some of the hospitals and
thus, decision of the State Government restricting installation of tower on the hospital is just,
proper and reasonable and in the public interest.” And had ordered “we uphold the impugned
bye-laws/policy decision of the State Government and direct:-
(1) That let the towers from hospitals be removed within a period of two months from today.
(2) That let towers from Colleges be also removed within two months from today.
(3) That since State Government has fixed the time for removal of towers within vicinity of
500 meters from the jail premises within six months, let it be implemented within the time
prescribed by the State Government in its order and bye-laws dated 31.8.2012.
(4) That in case any tower is existing near ancient monuments or old heritage building, the
removal be considered by the State Government and local authorities concerned examining
on facts on individual basis whether removal is necessary within two months from today.
(5) That similarly, the towers on playgrounds may also be looked into and appropriate action
be taken within two months from today.
1
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/96170233/
(6) That with respect to mobile handsets and issue of clearance for installation of mobile
towers, guidelines issued by DoT mentioned above be strictly enforced.
(7) That public be educated and made aware of different mobile sets in use whether they are
as per norms or not. Public be also informed about ill-effects of mobile handsets and towers
and precautions which are necessary as per guidelines issued by Dot. In this regard, let steps
be taken by DoT and COAI etc. to advertise them by different modes of communications.
(8) That the State Government and the Local Authorities to take decision on case wise basis
with regard to installation of towers in the densely populated areas in accordance with law.
Considering individual grievance, they can order removal of dangerous towers which are not
established as per norms and are erected without the permission. Thus, we give liberty to the
petitioners in the public interest litigation to approach the State Government/Local bodies in
this regard.
(9) That as the regulatory body has been framed by the Central Government in the form of
Telecom Enforcement, Resource and Monitoring (TERM) Cells, the Government may
consider whether it is appropriate to change its constitution by including the member of
general public so as to generate confidence in the public.
(10) That with respect to constant monitoring etc., requisite directions have been issued by
DoT and in the report of Inter-Ministerial Committee which has been accepted by the
Government of India be implemented as early as possible.
(11) That while granting permission for installation of towers, the concerned bodies to
consider number of mobile towers in area, what would be the effect on the health of people in
case towers are permitted to be erected and to minutely consider various other safeguards.”

Installation of Mobile Towers in Residential Areas Case Study

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Installation of Mobile Towers in Residential Areas Case Study

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Installation of Mobile Towers in Residential Areas Case Study

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A telecom infrastructure consists of electronic (active) and non-electronic infrastructure.

Important Judgements and Orders

You might also like