IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL WRIT JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO_________OF 2016 IN THE MATTER OF: Harish Chand Tiwari …Petitioner Versus Union of India & … Respondents Ors. WITH I.A. NO. _____________OF 2016 APPLICATION FOR EX-PARTE AD-INTERIM STAY PAPER BOOK [FOR INDEX:: KINDLY SEE INSIDE] ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER: [ ] SYNOPSIS That the instant Writ Petition is being preferred by the Petitioner, who is suffering from serious cancer disease -Hodgkin’s Lymphoma, caused by the continuous and prolonged exposure from tower radiation from the cell phone tower from Respondent No.3 BSNL, installed on the roof top of adjoining building of one Padam Gupta. The illegal cell phone tower was installed in 2002 without obtaining any permission from the Municipal Corporation and without adhering to any law governing its installation. The multiple antenna tower installed in the adjoining house is less than fifty meters away is over hanging the petitioner’s garden and the radiation hits directly into the house area 24/7 continuously for past 13 years, exposing occupants, including the Petitioner, to harmful electromagnetic radiation. Given the fact that radiation is directed sideways slant, the risk of exposure is far more to the people living adjacent to the towers than those living below it. The issue was pursued by the owners of the house where petitioner No1 lives with the respondents but with no results. The response of respondents and the local authorities was completely shocking and against their obligations to address the complaints effectively. That across India illegal towers has become very serious issue and wide spread fear with regard to ill effects of radiation leading to multiple litigation across India, where in each court has dealt with the issue in its own way, resulting varied points of view without their being one consolidated view to allay the fear of millions of people . With each passing year the fear has grown with more and more and more cases of cancer have being reported cross India with near conclusive indication of cause being exposure to cell tower radiation including the present petitioner’s case. Looking at both sides of the coin, where in the Respondent maintaining a stand that the studies are inconclusive and the number of studies and scientist very strongly maintaining that there is a strong connection between the cell tower Radiation and adverse health effects. It is also believed that that large number of studiesd namely the telephone studies, which have consistently maintained inconclusive stand, are believed to have been sponsored by the telecom operators and therefore unreliable. It is important to mention here that there are studies which have conclusussively established ill effects EMF radiation on bees, bird, rats and plants and these findings cannot be ignored considering that it may be true even for human beings . Whatever the ultimate truth may be one thing is clear that if there is no a conclusive evidence to show adverse health effects of electromagnetic radiation emitted from cell phone towers, there no conclusive study to show that the EMF Electromagnetic radiation from cell phone or its towers is safe for humans. In the back ground of there being a possibility of irreversible adverse effect on human health, it has become imperative to tread with caution and address the issues based on precautionary principles. Which principles has been completely given a go by and ignored by the Respondents, in its endeavor to achieve targets and goals, of making India, a country with highest teledensity in the world, achieving greater national GDP, however laudable this goal may, it cannot be at the cost of human welfare and well being , which is the paramount right enshrined in the constitution of India .Under Article/A 21. That despite advisory guide lines issued by the DoT in 2012 and 2013 governing installation of mobile tower, in depth inquiry has shown that more that more thant 50% towers in India are illegal and without following the statutory prescribed limits of radiation. Fact that on an average more than 50% towers are illegal, itself is evidence of the fact that the Respondent 1and 2 do not and have not taken their role seriously enough and miserably failed to take any effective remedial steps to deal with illegal towers coming up across India. In addition to illegal towers there is also issue with regard to current legal frame work /guide lines being inadequate, un balanced and lacking uniformity across India for installation, maintenance of radiation levels, risk-management of radiation/ and compliance, monitoring , grievance redressal and enforcement etc. In this behalf the inter-ministerial committee appointed in 2010, has given its report in 2011 with very important recommendation which have been approved by the Government of India, it is unfortunate that except for lowering the radiation levels from 2008 norm from 4.5mhz to 0.45 mhz and reducing the SAR value of hand set from 2 watt to 1.6 watt, (enforcement and compliance of which is also questionable). The Respondent 1and 2 have failed to incorporate any other valuable recommendations based on precautionary principles. Bare perusal of the 2013 guidelines will reveal that the guidelines in the larges interest of the telecom operators. While giving recommendation, the inter-ministerial committee had proceeded on basis of the precautionary principles like the rest of the world keeping mind the overwhelming evidence pointing towards strong connection between mobile tower/mobile phone radiation and dreadful diseases. Similarly the DoT has failed to incorporate guidelines framed by the MoEF, pursuant to studies conducted by them on radiation effect on the environment, bees and birds. The respondents have collectively failed to full fill their larger public duty by framing guidelines keeping mind precautionary principle and the recommendations of interminesterial committee and the MOEF. And single mindedly pursued only the agenda of the telecom operators, giving priority to commercial interest of few operators over safety of health and life of more than a billion people of this country., As the instrumentalities of the state the respondents were under constitutional obligation to oversee and ensure telecom network roll out, without in any manner jeopardizing health of petitioner and similarly placed people, especially when they belong to weaker sections of the community and unable to battle against the strong and powerful opponent, who is exploiting them. Mobile tower companies and Respondent 1 and 2 are violating constitutional and fundamental right of the petitioner and citizen of this country by installing illegal towers, not following prescribed limits of radiation and failing in certifications and compliance monitoring. The public stand taken by Government, DoT and the TRAI, stating that there is no connection between the mobile tower radiation and human health without there being any conclusive report to the effect that radiation is safe , is also violation of the fundamental right of the petitioners and the people at large. Because it is not disputed that EMF/EMR above certain levels can trigger biological effects, further WHO has opined that there are gaps in knowledge about biological effects exist and need further research. In view of the fact of very high number of illegal towers without level monitoring exist very strong possibility of adverse health effects and with gaps in knowledge it is imperative to fill up the existing lacunas in the current legal frame work to fully protect the peopl e That the Petitioner further submits that under present circumstances, U/A 21 of the Constitution of India every citizen of India is entitled to full and complete information of every aspect with regard to the radiation levels in the environment that they live in, in order make informed choices. The current compliance monitoring and information systems are grossly inadequate and therefore counterproductive. Under present guidelines there is no provision for providing complete information in public domain. The inter-ministerial committee has also recommended “Creation of national base with information on all base station, their emission levels and display on public domain”. In addition to above, it is submitted that the current guide line providing for self certification is against the public policy of India and needs to changed to a reliable third party certification, further the mandate of the TERM cell to conduct 10% compliance monitoring of existing towers, is arbitrary and against the public interest, keeping in mind that said system has completely failed, as also noted by the Parliamentary Standing Committee. The serious threat to human health and the fact that more than 50% cell phone towers on average in India are illegal. There is an urgent need to compliance monitor 100% base stations, which will in turn also help in resolving the illegal towers issue. It is humbly submitted that in case of lack of adequate legal frame work /guidelines only this Hon’ble Court has the jurisdiction to frame uniform guidelines across all states in India to safeguard public health and the humble petitioner has no other option but approach this Hon’ble Court to remedy large scale menace of illegal, unmonitored mobile towers across India hence the petition. As regards the Petitioner, directions be issued to the Respondent No. 4 by this Hon’ble Court to immediately remove its tower from the locality where the Petitioners are residing for being illegal and unauthorized and in violation of guide lines. That the Respondent No 3 on the principle of restitution, be further directed to pay compensation in terms of money and life time treatment to the Petitioner No 1. LIST OF DATES Since The Petitioner has been working continuously as 1990 domestic help in the house of late Shri Prakash Sharma, Ashok Bhawan, Dal Bazaar, Lashkar, Gwalior, MP. BSNL, the Respondent No 3 herein, installed mobile 2002 tower on the roof top of the premises of one Sh. Padam Gupta (adjoining residence of the Petitioner), without obtaining any permission from the Municipal Corporation and in violation of all rules, norms and guidelines issued by Government of India and its authorities in this regard. The multiple antenna tower (approx seven to eight antennae) installed on the house within less than fifty meters distance, overhanging the garden of petitioner’s residence with the radiation coming directly into the house area that’s open to sky 24/7, for past 11 years, exposing occupants, including the Petitioner, to harmful electromagnetic radiation and 2002 eventually leading to cancer and other diseases. to That the employer of the Petitioner, Shri Prakash 2005 Sharma immediately took up this issue with the Local authorities and BSNL officers with regard to structural safety and bad effects of radiation, with out any positive 09.04.06 result. Shri Prakash Sharma passed away after a brief illness 04.11.08 and the complaint was not pursued thereafter. Belatedly, Govt. of India, adopted the International Commission for Non Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) Guidelines vide letter no 842-998 /2008AS_IV /14dated 4th Nov 08, which are follows ,  License conditions of Operators were amended on 4.11.2008, with directions to comply to ICNIRP prescribed radiation norms. Directions to report compliance of radiation limits/ levels through annual self certification of their BTS to the respective Telecom Enforcement Resource & Monitoring (TERM) Units of Licensor (DoT). 30.08.10 the Ministry of Environment & Forests, (Wild Life Division) also constituted a committee in 2010 to assess the level of possible impacts of growth of mobile towers in Urban, Sub-urban and even rural/forest area on the population of birds and bees and to suggest appropriate 01.09.10 mitigate measures to address the problem. In wake of growing concern and large scale reports of individuals being affected with cancer in the vicinity of mobile towers, PMO was constrained to constitute a high powered committee to examine effects of EMF radiation. consisting of officers Department of Telecom, Indian Council of Medical research, Ministry of Health, Department of Biotechnology and Ministry of Environment and Forest to examine the effect of EMF 01-01-11 Radiation from base stations and mobile phones. Inter-Ministerial Committee submitted it report inter alia giving recommendation and reduced the power from 4.5 watts/sqm to 0.45watts/sqm and SAR levels of mobile phone from 2 to 1.6 watts/kg. 01.09.12 DoT enforced new norm for EMR based on inter ministerial committee report, which was approved by Govt. of India, to reduce electromagnetic radiation emanating from every tower by one-tenth of existing 01.08.13 permissible limits of 2008 ,4.5 mhz to 0.45 mhz The DoT issued new guide lines in supersession of all earlier guidelines to all State Govt. for installation of mobile towers. Broadly, these guidelines envisage the service provider obtaining requisite permission for installation of mobile towers and BTSs from the State in which the tower is being installed, and from the local body within whose jurisdiction the tower is to be placed, prescribing audit standard for TERM Cells relating to the placement and position of the proposed BTS's with reference to existing towers and BTSs. This is apart from the clearance that the service provider is obliged to obtain from the "Standing Advisory Committee for Frequency Allocations" (SACFA). Some of the salient compliances which these guidelines require are: "(a) A SACFA clearance; (b) Structural Stability Certificate; (c) Clearance from the Fire Safety Department; (d) Clearance and NOC from local bodies; (e) Payment of regulatory 17.09.13 fees" Two big glandular swelling were noticed on the neck of the Petitioner, he was immediately referred to civil hospital, and was suggested biopsy, petitioner was operated upon and tissue slide was sent for 07.10.13 histopathology. Immediately a letter was issued to Respondent no.4 by petitioner No 2 Sh. Anil Sharma regarding his meeting with General Manager and AGM of Respondent no.4 to 25.10.13 explain them the situation and for removal of tower . Histopathology report was received which was indicative of “Granulomatous Lymphadenitis” Tubercular glands (TB) Based on the histopathology report, indicating TB the petitioner was administered TB 13.11.13 medication for period one year. Patient was administered medication for TB for period over one year. But the patient redeveloped the gland on the same place. As the patient was under medication for this regard for TB an FNAC test was conducted instead 27.11.13 of operation. A legal notice through counsel was issued to the 21.01.14 Respondents. The Respondent no.2 replied to the legal notice saying that it has no role to play in installation of mobile phone 28.01.14 towers. Another Legal notice was issued to Respondent No1 08.02.14 and 4, DoT and BSNL. Respondent no.4 replied to the legal notice malafidely and wrongly alleging that there is no health hazard October associated with cell phone towers. Petitioner No 1 noticed redeveloped glands on the same 2014 place and went for medical examination, when he was 12.02.15 advised to undergo FNAC, the needle test. In the meanwhile FNAC Report of the Petitioner was received which pointed towards possibility of cancer. Further confirmative test, including removal of gland 28.02.15 was advised. Excision biopsy of lymph node was conducted in Cancer Hospital and Research Institute, Gwalior. Histopathology report of cancer hospital Gwalior, again 03.03.15 diagnosed it as TB. But as matter of abundant precaution sample was also sent to Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre and after due care and precaution of confirmative IHC test it was declared that the gland was cancerous 05.03.15 and patient suffered from “Hodgkins Lymphoma”. The Petitioner was advised Chemotherapy and was accordingly administered chemotherapy treatment for four months, followed by radio therapy for further two months. After completion of Radio therapy petitioner 11.08.15 was put on oral medication. Standing committee telecom tabled its report in Lok Sabha on Action Taken by the Government on the Observations/Recommendations of the Committee contained in their Fifty-third Report (Fifteenth Lok Sabha) on ‘Norms for setting up of telecom towers, its harmful effects and setting up of security standards in 06.09.15 expansion of telecom facilities’. After completion of Radio therapy oral medication was 01.12.15 started and still going on to prevent reoccurrence. Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Hospital Suggested 18F FDG whole body PET -CT scan to check restaging of Lymphoma and with God’s grace no restaging was found and patient was declared clean, However, reoccurrence cannot be ruled out in view of continued .05.2016 exposure to radiation. Hence this Writ Petition. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) WRIT PETITION (C) NO.___________OF 2016 IN THE MATTER OF: 1. Harish Chand Tiwari aged about 42 years, S/o Sham Sharan Tiwari Ashok Bhawan Dal Bazaar, Gwalior 2. Sh. Anil Sharma S/o Late Sh. Prakash Sharma R/o Ashok Bhawan, Dal Bazaar, Gwalior, MP …. Petitioners VERSUS 1. Union of India Through Secretary Department of Telecommunications, Ministry of Information Technology, Sanchar Bhawan 20, Ashoka Road New Delhi 110001 2. The Chairman, Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Mahanagar Doorsanchar Bhawan, Jawaharlal Nehru Marg, New Delhi – 110002 3. The Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Corporate Office, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi 4 Muncipal Corporation of Gwalior Through Municipal Commissioner … Respondent s WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA TO THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA AND HIS COMPANION JUSTICES OF THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA THE HUMBLE PETITION OF THE PETITIONER ABOVE NAMED: MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH: 1. That, the instant Writ Petition has been filed by the above named Petitioners on behalf of themselves and their families(representative capacity?) for protection from harmful Electromagnetic Radiation from the BSNL, multiple antenna mobile tower (seven to eight antennae) installed in extremely close proximity of the residence of the petitioner. Petitioner No. 1 is suffering from serious cancer disease, due to continuous exposure to EMF radiation from the Respondent No 3 BSNL Mobile tower since more than 13 years. The tower is installed at the roof top of the premises, adjacent to the residence of the petitioner, praying to this Hon’ble Court inter alia, seeking a writ in nature of mandamus thereby directing the Respondent No. 3 to immediately remove its tower and direct all the Respondents to pay compensation in terms of money and cost for life treatment to the petitioner, further direct Respondent No.1 and 2 ensure full compliance of the existing norms for installation of towers, to curb the menace of rampant illegal tower installed over India and amend, modify and supplement the current law to adequately cover the existing lacunas and short comings in installation, monitoring and compliance radiation norms, also in view of the recommendations of the inter-ministerial committee, which were approved by the Govt. of India. Review/modify prescribed levels as per existing international standards and in view of the possibility of harm from current levels and further to amend existing norms /guide lines of Respondent no 1 keeping in mind precautionary principle to protect the people at large. 2. The respondent No1 is Department of Telecommunications (DoT), under Ministry of Communications & Information Technology., The grant of licenses for establishment of a mobile network and connected aspects are administered and regulated by the DOT. The issue of fixation of standards, monitoring of compliance and other allied aspects emanating from radiation emissions by mobile towers and BTSs is laid down by DOT. 3. That the respondent No2 TRAI --with the entry of private sector in the provision of telecommunication services a need was felt to have an independent regulatory body. Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) was established in the year 1997 in pursuance of TRAI (Ordinance) 1997, which was later replaced by an Act of Parliament, to regulate the telecommunication services. TRAI is entrusted with recommendatory, regulatory and tariff setting functions. Which include compliance of terms and conditions of license, effective management of spectrum, lay down the standards of quality of service to be provided by the service providers and ensure the quality of service and conduct the periodical survey of such service provided by the service providers so as to protect interest of the consumers of telecommunication service, ensure effective compliance of Universal Service Obligations. 4. That the Res No 3 is the Bharat Sanchar Nigam was incorporated on 15 Sep 2000, it took over the business of telecom services and net work management from Central Government. BSNL is one of the largest public sector undertakings providing comprehensive range of telecom services. It is also responsible for installation of mobile tower near the residence of the petitioner. 5. That the respondent no 4 the municipal corporation of Gwalior, under whose jurisdiction the tower is situate. 6. That it is relevant to mention here the last decade is characterized by significant penetration of telecommunications in India. This growth has been primarily fuelled by the cellular segment (mobile phones) a tele-density of 3.58% in March 2001 to 78.13% in February, 2015 the composition of the telecom sector too has witnessed a structural change, with the private sector accounting for around 88 % of the total connections. While urban teledensity has risen to 148%, rural teledensity has also increased significantly to 40%. The telecom policy has set ambitious targets of 100% rural teledensity and 600 million broadband connections by 2020. 7. This great leap in both the number of subscribers and revenues from telecom services has contributed significantly to the growth in GDP and employment. According to various reports increase in 10% penetration of mobile broadband leads to more than 1% increase in GDP of country. Telecom towers are critical installations on which the backbone of mobile communication rests. A robust and scalable mobile infrastructure including towers is must for universal access to communication., 8. That in pursuance of its target the Respondents completely over looked the adverse health effects from EMF/ radiation and were quick to proceed believing “current evidence does not confirm the existence of any health consequences from exposure to low level electromagnetic field”, completely overlooking the flip side that there is no conclusive evidence to show that the impugned radiation is safe for humans. And proceeded to make rules, regulations, guidelines based on the unproven presumption of safety of current levels of radiation emitted and inadvertently exposing the people including petitioners to EMF radiation by erecting towers across India without proper permission and monitoring. 9. The respondents collectively failed to full fill their constitutional obligation and ensure safety of petitioners and public at large from illegal towers and un-monitored radiation, inadequate legal frame work etc leading to gross violation of the rights of the petitioner No1. by continuously exposing him to EMF /radiation for long periods of time, almost 13 years, resulting in cancer. In view of the conclusive finding that high levels of radiation. 10. That petitioner here in after has relied riled on some important studies, reports and data in support of its contention, which very strongly point towards very serious health hazards and adverse effects being caused due to continuous exposure from electromagnetic radiation from cell phone towers necessitating intervention of this Hon’ble court in framing stringent guidelines, for safeguarding right to life and liberty of people as guaranteed under Article 21 of constitution of India, which power only this court alone has. 11. So far the most reliable and independent report by sage associates /David carpenter known as Bioinitiative Report of 2012 have linked several adverse health effects to electromagnetic fields from mobile tower and handsets including effects on wildlife like birds, bats, honey bees, etc. Some of the health effects reported are effect on cell growth, cell differentiation, DNA damage, altered immune system, hormonal effects, pervasive impairment of metabolic and reproductive system, effect on fertility, reproduction and health of off-springs, risk of glioma (a malignant brain tumour), sleep disorders, confusion, anxiety and depression and appetite disturbance, etc. and have suggested that minimum possible exposure levels and similarly Health Council of Netherlands in their report mobile phones and cancer part 1 Epidemiology of tumors in the head has held there is not reson not apply the ALARA principle to exposure to RF/EMF ,meaning that exposure should be AS LOW AS RESONABLY ACHEIVABLE . 12. On 14.04.2008 the Russian National Committee of Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection - consisting of Professor Yuri Grigoriev from Federal Medical Biophysical Centre, Dr Nina Rubtsova at the RAMS Institute of Occupational Health, Dr Anton Merkulov at the Center for Electromagnetic Safety, Professor Igor Belyaev at Institute of General Physics of Russian Academy of Science resolved that the current safety standards for exposure to microwaves from the mobile phones have been developed for the adults and don’t consider the characteristic features of the children’s organism. 13. The WHO also considers the protection of the children’s health from possible negative influence of the EMF of the mobile phones as a highest priority task. This problem has also been confirmed by the Scientific Committee of the European Commission, by national authorities of the European and Asian countries, by participants of the International scientific conferences on biological effects of the EMF. Potential risk for the children’s health is very high: (a) the absorption of the electromagnetic energy in a child’s head is considerably higher than that in the head of an adult (children’s brain has higher (b) conductivity, smaller size, thin skull bones, smaller distance from the antenna etc.); (c) children’s organism has more sensitivity to the EMF, than the adult’s; (d) children’s brain has higher sensitivity to the accumulation of the adverse effects under conditions of chronic exposure to the EMF; (e) EMF affects the formation of the process of the higher nervous activity; today’s children will spend essentially longer time using mobile phones, than today’s adults will. According to the opinion of the Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, the following health hazards are likely to be faced by the children mobile phone users in the nearest future: (i) Disruption of memory, decline of attention, diminishing learning and cognitive abilities, increased irritability, sleep problems, increase in (ii) sensitivity to the stress, increased epileptic readiness. Expected (possible) remote health risks: brain tumors, tumors of acoustical and vestibular nerves (in the age of 25-30 years), Alzheimer’s disease, “got dementia”, depressive syndrome, and the other types of degeneration of the nervous structures of the brain (in the age of 50 to 60). 14. The members of the Russian National Committee on Non- Ionizing Radiation Protection emphasize ultimate urgency to defend children’s health from the influence of the EMF of the mobile communication systems. We appeal to the government authorities, to the entire society to pay closest attention to this coming threat and to take adequate measures in order to prevent negative consequences to the future generation’s health. The children using mobile communication are not able to realize that they subject their brain to the EMF radiation and their health – to the risk. We believe that this risk is not much lower than the risk to the children’s health from tobacco or alcohol. It is our professional obligation not to let damage the children’s health by inactivity. 15. That the present writ petition raises the following questions of Public Importance Questions of Public Importance 1. Whether the rampant illegal towers with largely unmonitored emission levels infringe the rights of the petitioner’s and public at large u/a 21. 2. Whether current guide lines /rules, regulations/legal frame work is adequate and sufficient to deal with the threats of possibility of adverse effects of EMF radiation. 3. Whether current guide lines /rules, regulations/legal frame work are balanced to further the commercial interest in harmony with the welfare and well being of the petitioner and public at large. 4. Whether in absence of adequate guidelines / legislation this Court alone has power to lay down guidelines in matters concerning health hazards from EMF radiation from mobile towers and mobile handsets, as held in [Vishakha and Ors. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., 1997 (6) SCC 241] 5. Whether the respondents were under obligation to adopt the recommendations of the inter-ministerial committee based on precautionary principle to protect citizens of this country. 6. Whether current available scientific studies and reports constitute sufficient evidence to conclusively link EMF radiation to adverse health effects, more so in the fact of the conclusive finding based on studies that EMF radiation has adversely affected the bees, birds and animals. 7. Whether the current prescribed levels of radiation have been conclusively established to be safe for human, plant and animal life? 8. Whether self certification of radiation levels by service provider is against the public policy of India? 9. Whether citizens of India have constitutional right u/a 21 to have full and complete information in public domain on mobile towers around them? 10. Whether EMF radiation is a pollutant? 11.Whether principle of restitution shall be available to the petitioner? 16. Brief facts leading to filing of the instant Writ Petition are set out herein below: i. That the petitioner has been working as domestic help /care taker in the house of Shri Prakash Sharma for last twenty six years at Ashok Bhavan, Dal Bazaar Gwalior. In the year 2002 multiple antenna BTS (Base Transmitting Stations) of Respondent no.3 BSNL was installed on the roof top of adjoining building of one Padam Gupta, without obtaining any permission and in violation of other norms ensuring structural safety safe distance etc . Sh. Prakash Sharma took up this issue with Municipal Authorities and the G.M of Respondent No 4. The Color photographs of the Mobile Tower installed by the BSNL Company are annexed herewith and marked as Annexure – P/ 1 (Page ii. That Sh. Prakash Sharma pursued this issue of removal of the tower with local authorities for several years with no result. Shri Prakash Sharma passed away on 9 April th 2006,. After the death of Shri Prakash Sharma the complaint was not pursued. The petitioner No 1 is only person who lived in the house continuously for period 13 years till date. iii. In September, 2013 two big glandular swelling were noticed on the neck of the Petitioner, he was immediately referred to civil hospital, and was suggested biopsy petitioner was operated upon and tissue slide was sent for histopathology. Report was received which was indicative of “Granulomatous Lymphadenitis” Tubercular glands (TB) Based on the histopathology report, indicating TB the petitioner was administered TB medication for period one year. True copy of the medical reports dated 25.10.13 and 13-11-2013 are annexed herewith and marked as Annexure – P/2 and P/3 (Page. iv. That despite medication the Petitioner redeveloped the glands on the same place after gap of one year. Since the Petitioner was under medication for TB, an FNAC (needle test) was conducted. The FNAC Report received on 12-02-15 pointed towards possibility of cancer. Further confirmative test, including removal of gland was advised. On 28-02-15 excision biopsy of lymph node was conducted in Cancer Hospital and Research Institute, Gwalior. Histopathology report of cancer hospital Gwalior, again diagnosed it as TB. But as matter of abundant precaution tissue sample were also sent to Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Center, at New Delhi and after conducting series of test and confirmative Immuno Histochemistry (IHC) test, it was declared that the gland was cancerous and petitioner suffered from “Hodgkins Lymphoma”a type of cancer caused when an infection-fighting cell called a B cell develops a mutation in its DNA. The mutation causes a large number of oversized, abnormal B cells to accumulate in the lymphatic system, where they crowd out healthy cells and cause Hodgkin's lymphoma. Copy of Lab Test Report of Rajive Gandhi research institute dated 3-03-15 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure –P/4(Page v. That the Petitioner No1 was advised Chemotherapy and was accordingly administered chemotherapy treatment for four months, followed by radio therapy for further two months, till 6-9-15. Copy of chemo therapy prescription Cancer Hospital and Research institute dated 05-03-15 is annexed here with as Annexure P /5(Page vi. After completion of Radio therapy Petitioner was put on oral medication. On 01-12-15 Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Hospital Suggested 18F _FDG whole body PET -CT scan to check restaging of Lymphoma and with God’s grace no restaging was found and patient was declared clean, however oral medication continues and possibility of its recurrence cannot be ruled be out in face of continued exposure to radiation. Copy of Nuclear health care LTD date 15-12-2015 is annexed here with as Annexure P /6 (Page vii. That a letter was issued to Respondent no.3 by Sh. Anil Sharma regarding his meeting with General Manager and AGM of Respondent no.3 to explain them the situation but to the distress of the petitioner no steps were undertaken by Respondent no. 4 for removal of tower from a thickly populated area. The true copy of letter dated 07.10.2013 by Sh. Anil Sharma is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure – P/ 7 (Page…. To…...). viii. That after the Petitioner No1 was detected with cancer, petitioner No 2 being the employer of petitioner 1 sent a legal notice to the Respondent No1 and 2, only (TRAI) replied stating that they have no role in granting permission for the installation of mobile tower. While DoT and BSNL never replied to the notice, but two member team from DoT visited the site and by just looking at the tower, verbally informed petitioners that radiation is within norms, without conducting any tests to the satisfaction of the petitioner . DoT team completely ignored the fact that tower was located in extreme close proximity to the house, less than fifty meters, has more than prescribed numbers of antennas. The tower still stands tall spewing radiation. Similar was the attitude of the local authorities. The casual approach and attitude of the authorities and DoT was shocking. True copy of the legal notice dated 28-01-14 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure – P/8 (Page…. ) . ix. True copy of the reply notice dated 21.01.2014 of the Respondent no. 2 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure – P/ 9(Page……) . Development of Law governing EMF radiation in India x. The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection Guidelines (ICNIRP), were adopted by the Union Government in 2008. ICNIRP Guidelines mandated that the exposure limit to electromagnetic radiation from mobile towers and BTS's should be limited to 0.08 W/kb. Consequent to the adoption of these guidelines the licensing conditions of all telecom service providers in the country were amended and measures were put in place requiring them to comply with the radiation norms as prescribed by and under the ICNIRP guidelines. xi. That the adverse effect of radiation grew stronger and the tThe Ministry of Communications and Technology, Department of Telecommunication, was constrained, on the intervention of the then PMO, an inter-ministerial committee consisting of member from Indian council of medical research (IMRC), Ministry of Health, Department of Biotechnology was constituted to examine the effect of EMF radiation from base stations and mobile phones. Copy of report of inter ministerial committee on EMF Radiation is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure – P/ 10 xii. (Page The Environment & Forests, (Wild Life Division) also constituted a committee on 3 August 2010 to assess the 0th level of possible impacts of growth of mobile towers in Urban, Sub-urban and even rural/forest area on the population of birds and bees and to suggest appropriate mitigative measures to address to the problem. The true typed copy of advisory on the use of mobile towers to minimize their impact on wild life including birds and bees dated 09.08.2012 issued by the MOEF are annexed herewith and marked as Annexure – P/11 (Page….. to…….) xiii. Subsequently and based upon the recommendations made by an Inter Ministerial Committee constituted by the Union Government which examined the issue of electromagnetic radiation a policy of abundant caution was adopted. On 30 December 2011, DOT enforced stricter norms providing for radiation from BTS's being limited to 1/10th of the limits prescribed by the ICNIRP guidelines. These limits as they stand disclosed in the Affidavit filed before us are as follows: 8. To ensure compliance of the standards, DOT, on 8 April 2010 directed all licensees to comply with the reference limits/levels adopted by the Government of India in respect of EMF radiation norms by way of a self- certification procedure of their BTS's. DOT is also stated to have thereafter constituted TERM Cells for different regions of the country and presently as Page 4 © Manupatra Information Solutions Pvt. Ltd. per the statutory and regulatory framework in place, service providers can energize their BTSs commercially only after the self certification testing procedure is completed and a certificate in respect thereof has been duly submitted to the TERM Cell. xiv. In August 2013, DOT issued the "Advisory Guidelines for State Governments for Issue of Clearance for Installation of Mobile Towers". These Guidelines dated 1 August 2013 have been issued by DOT in supersession of all earlier guidelines and circulars issued on the subject. Broadly, these guidelines envisage the service provider obtaining requisite permission for installation of mobile towers and BTSs from the State in which the tower is being installed, and from the local body within whose jurisdiction the tower is to be placed, prescribing audit standard for TERM Cells relating to the placement and position of the proposed BTS's with reference to existing towers and BTSs. This is apart from the clearance that the service provider is obliged to obtain from the "Standing Advisory Committee for Frequency Allocations" (SACFA). Some of the salient compliances which these guidelines require are: "(a) A SACFA clearance; (b) Structural Stability Certificate; (c) Clearance from the Fire Safety Department; (d) Clearance and NOC from local bodies; (e) Payment of regulatory fees" 9. DOT apart from the above is also stated to have issued instructions to TERM Cells for carrying out technical audits of BTS's and to measure periodically the radiation from the towers which have come into commercial operation. For this purpose detailed guidelines have been codified by the Telecommunication Engineering Center called the "Test Procedure for Measurement of Electro Magnetic Fields From Base Station Antenna". 10. The State of U.P. has framed building byelaws with reference to the powers conferred? The true typed copy of modified guidelines issued by the Govt. of India dated 01.08.2013 are annexed herewith and marked as Annexure – P/12 (Page…..to….) xv. Standing committee telecom tabled its report dated 11.08.2015 in Lok Sabha on Action Taken by the Government on the Observations/Recommendations of the Committee contained in their Fifty-third Report (Fifteenth Lok Sabha) on ‘Norms for setting up of telecom towers, its harmful effects and setting up of security standards in expansion of telecom facilities’. xvi. The Petitioner is 42 years of age, having two small school going children, wife and dependent parents. He could not even afford huge treatment cost and the same was borne by his employers. After completion of Radio therapy on 06.09.15 oral medication was started and still going on to prevent reoccurrence along with himself his children are also at grave risk . xvii. The Petitioner’s illness and treatment has left him weak and lacking in strength and much reduced working ability. Therefore not capable of taking up any job anywhere else. The right to life of the petitioner has been violated by gross inaction by the respondents. Union of India and Department of Tele- communications have failed to fulfill their Constitutional obligation/public duty to frame proper and sufficient legal frame work to protect citizens of India from harmful effect of RF/EMR in wake of over whelming scientific evidence connecting EMR from mobile towers to serious health hazards. The Tower installed by the Respondent No. 5 needs to be immediately removed from the locality where the petitioner is residing and a further direction may be issued to all the Respondents on the principle of restitution to pay compensation in terms of money and life time treatment to the petitioner. xviii. The Respondent No.1 maintains that in order to maintain continuity of service, it is imperative that mobile towers be placed in all areas including residential and commercial areas. Bearing in mind the above objective that DOT, does not place any limitation of a permissible distance between towers. For the aforesaid reason also it is contended that there is no restriction on the placement of these towers near schools, hospitals or residential areas. According to the respondents, the prescription of adherence to a norm which is 1/10th of the safe limit prescribed by ICNIRP is a sufficient safeguard against all perceived dangers to human health. They submitted that even in the case of multiple sites or cluster of antennas installed in close proximity the overall radiation limits are not permitted to exceed the exposure limits mandated by Department of Telecommunication (DoT) Completely over looking following facts xix. Brief facts about EMR Cell towers emit microwaves which are non ionizing type of Electro Magnetic Radiation (EMR).Which have two types of reported effects (of EMF exposure) on human health (A) Bioeffects and (B) health effects: - 1. Bio-effects are of two types i.e (A).Thermal Effects:- Refers to the heat generated due to absorption of EMF radiation causing body temperature to increase. Prolonged thermal effect may lead to increase in body temperature. It is said that being in close proximity of tower is like being in micro wave oven 24x7. (B) Non-Thermal Effects:Non-thermal effects are attributed to the induced electromagnetic effects inside the biological cells of the body which is more harmful.  When a human body is exposed to the electromagnetic radiation, it absorbs radiation, because human body consists of 70% liquid. It is similar to that of cooking in the microwave oven where the water in the food content is heated first. Microwave absorption effect is much more significant by the body parts which contain more fluid (water, blood, etc.), like the brain which consists of about 90% water. Effect is more pronounced where the movement of the fluid is less, for example, eyes, brain, joints, heart, abdomen, etc. Also, human height is much greater than the wavelength of the cell tower transmitting frequencies, so there will be multiple resonances in the body, which creates localized heating inside the body. This results in boils, drying up of the fluids around eyes, brain, joints, heart, abdomen, etc.  A study in FRANCE (Santini, 2002) In this study the people who lived closest to the cellular antennas had the highest incidences of the following disorders: fatigue, sleep disturbances, headaches, feeling of discomfort, difficulty in concentrating, depression, memory loss, visual disruptions, irritability, hearing disruptions, skin problems, cardiovascular disorders, and dizziness. And suggested that the BTS must be at least 300 meters from in habited areas .  GERMANY (Eger H, 2004) The aim of this study was to examine whether people living close to cellular transmitter antennas were exposed to a greater risk of becoming ill with malignant tumors. The researchers found that the proportion of newly developing cancer cases was significantly higher among those patients who had lived within 400 meters from the cellular transmitter site during the past 10 years, compared to those patients living further away. They also found that the patients fell ill on average 8 years earlier. After five years of operation of the transmitting installation, the relative risk of getting cancer had increased by 3-fold for the residents of the area near the installation, compared to the inhabitants outside the area. Breast cancer topped the list, and the average age of contracting this disease was considerably lower, 50.8 years compared to 69.9 years for the people living in the outer area. Cancers of the prostate, pancreas, bowel, skin melanoma, lung and blood cancer were all increased.  ISRAEL (Wolf R, Wolf D, 2004)This study, based on medical records of people living within 350 meters of a long established phone mast, showed a fourfold increased incidence of cancer compared with the general population of Israel, and a tenfold increase specifically among women, compared with the surrounding locality further from the mast.  SPAIN (Oberfeld 2004)This study found significant illhealth effects among those living in the vicinity of two GSM mobile phone base stations. The strongest five associations found were depressive tendency, fatigue, sleeping disorder, difficulty in concentration and cardiovascular problems. The scientists reported the following symptoms within 50 to 150 m of the cell phone antenna at an average power density of 0.11 + 0.19 μW/cm2. Note that 0.11 μW/cm2 is considerably lower than 1000 μW/ cm2 established by the FCC. This demonstrates that the FCC guideline does not protect the public from radio frequency radiation exposure.  Communication antennas/towers saturate the environment with multiple electromagnetic frequencies simultaneously. The response to this endless cellular jiggling is graphically described by Amy Worthington in her article on the radiation poisoning of America. "Human DNA hears this energetic cacophony loud and clear, reacting like the human ear would to high volume country music, plus rock and roll screaming from the same speaker simultaneously. Irradiated cells struggle to protect themselves against the destructive dissonance by hardening their membranes. They cease to receive nourishment, stop releasing toxins, die prematurely and spill micronuclei fragments into a sort of tumor bank account."  It has been known for a decade that RF/microwaves from cell phones and tower transmitters cause damage in human blood cells which results in nuclei splintering off into micronuclei fragments. The development of micronuclei heralds the development of pre-cancerous conditions. Sixyear industry study showed that human blood exposure to cell phone radiation had a 300 percent increase in genetic damage in the form of micronuclei, suggesting a health threat much greater than smoking or asbestos.  Numerous animal studies have demonstrated that mobile phone radiation quickly causes DNA single and double strand breaks at levels well below the current federal "safe" standards. Well know Reported Cases (i) Australia The top floors of a Melbourne office building were closed down and 100 people were evacuated after a seventh worker in seven years was diagnosed with a brain tumour. The Australian Health Research Institute indicates that due to billions of times more in volume electromagnetic radiation emitted by billions of mobile phones, internet, intranet and wireless communication data transmission, almost one-third of world population (about 2 billion) may suffer from Cell Phone Cancer beside other major body disorders like heart ailments, impotency, migraine (ii) India: Builder in Riddhi Park, Thakurlee (West) had installed mobile tower before the residents had occupied the building. Within 4 months of occupying the top floor flat, Mrs. Bhat was diagnosed with “brain tumor”. She used to feel fatigued; and also suffered from white rashes on the body. Her neighbor delivered a baby with cancer of spinal cord. Another neighbor gave birth to a child having “Birth Defects”; and the child died immediately after birth. All the residents of the building are now demanding the demolition of the tower. In spite of these demands by residents, builder has installed another tower. Mrs. Bhat has left her flat now staying in Goregaon and spent around Rs. 10 lakhs for treatment on brain tumor. However her health is now improving. (iii) TERM wing in Mumbai has been receiving complaints from citizens about high radiation levels from mobile towers for some time now. While sifting through these complaints, DoT officials came across a residential building, Jawan Nagar Society in Borivali (West), where six individuals from five different families had been diagnosed with cancer over the past five to six years. Five out of these six individuals had died. (iv) After repeated complaints were made by Jaipur-based Sudhir Kasliwal, who had two mobile towers close to his residence, the city municipality sealed both of them. But not before he lost one brother to glioma, a form of brain cancer. Another brother is afflicted with the same disease and fighting for his life. Kasliwal, who runs a jewellery business out of the capital of Rajasthan, told Firstpost that what was a scary coincidence was when he and his family members discovered that their pet dog had also died on account of a brain tumour. This incident stirred up a controversy in Jaipur."Radiation levels measured by TERM revealed maximum radiation on the first floor of the building where I live," he said."Two siblings, both living on the first floor barely ten metres away from mobile towers being affected with cancer is definitely not an usual situation," Kasliwal said. The method of calculating radiation levels is another contentious issue. Kasliwal alleges that TERM has no equipment to measure radiation levels and use machines provided by cell phone operators. (v)Case study of Usha Kiran Building, Mumbai news reported in Midday, Mumbai dated Jan. 3, 2010, which stated -Mumbai's swanky Usha Kiran building says the four cancer cases there could be linked to mobile towers installed on the facing Vijay Apartments. The picture taken from the Usha Kiran building of the several antennas installed on the seventh floor of Vijay Apartments is shown in Fig. 2. People living in the 6th, 7th and 8 floor in the opposite building th will get maximum radiation as they are in the main beam direction. People living on the other floors will receive lesser radiation as beam maxima is reduced considerably as can be observed from vertical radiation pattern. In the horizontal direction again, people living in the front side of the antenna will receive much higher radiation compared to people living in the back side of antenna. (xx) The list is endless and millions of people who have been diagnosed with cancer and other diseases after coming in contact with radiation. But the propaganda of denial continues by TRAI and DoT and Ministers of Telecom, they continue to deny this only to benefit the telecom industry, no one cares as to how many people have died or will continue to die due to radiation. The humble petitioner s last hope is this Hon’ble court, as all court across India have given varying judgments which are not being implemented, in view of the fact that this serious problem is pan India, there is an urgent and immediate need to find a comprehensive solution, which need to be implemented in true letter and spirit by the respondent and it is only this Hon’ble court that is empowered to perform this humongous task in the interest of millions of people of India.  Recommendation of The inter-ministerial committee also recommended the following measures on account of growing public concern of adverse effect of EMF radiation on health certain measures may have to be initiated for building confidence of general public as underlined below : (a) To provide static continuous testing / measuring centers for online monitoring of radiation level on 24X7 basis at prominent places in metro / cities and the data sent to the central server for further processing as is being done by the Ministry of Environment and Forest through Central pollution Control Board in case of Pollution level measurement i.e. noise and air quality to enhance the confidence of general public. (b) Apart from self certification for compliance of radiation norms on EMF exposure by the mobile service providers they may be asked to measure the radiation level of certain prominent places and display it for information of the general public. (c) The service providers should also have mobile unit for its measurement wherever necessary. (d) Creation of national data base with the information of all the base station, their emission levels and display on public domain for public information. (e) The information of the SAR value for mobile phone should be readily available to consumer at the point of sale. (f) The Information should be made available on Government web site with list of SAR values of different mobile phones. (g) Use of low power transmitters inside cities decrease the amount of radiated power hence use of low power transmitter with in-building solutions as provided in western countries may be considered in place of present trend of using high powered transmitters over high rise towers. (h) (xxi) Public education program needs to be undertaken. Despite the approved recommendations of inter ministerial committee report the DoT refuses to be persuaded by it own committee recommendations. (xxii) The 2013 guide lines continue to provide for self certification-- by operators certifying that all General Public areas around the tower will be within safe EMR exposure limit as per peak traffic measurement. (xxiii) 2013 guide lines continue with the requirement of TERM cells to carry out compliance monitoring (only) of ten percent towers only. (xxiv) For the first time guidelines provided for states and local bodies to constitute telecom committees to ensure fast track single window clearance for tower installations and to grant electric connection on priority . (xxv) Provided for constitution of grievance redressal system at state and district levels through local committees. (xxvi) Ground Realty :- The Hindu in 2010 reported industry officials reveal that in Delhi as well as other townships, over 50 per cent towers Operational today are illegal as they have come up without proper clearances. New Delhi, it was reported by the MCD “that out of 5,459 mobile phone towers installed under the jurisdiction of MCD, 2717 towers have been set up without permission”. Same is the story with other metro and NCR areas. GURGAON: Nov 2015- Officials said there are 580 mobile phone towers in the city, of which only 26 have permission while 554 are illegal. Authorities claim they have initiated a legal process to take action against illegal towers, deputy commissioner TL Satyaprakash has decided to set up a telecom committee comprising Huda and MCG officials along with police officers to look into the matter. Gurgaon reported 90% towers to be without permission. GHAZIABAD: There are 615 illegal mobile phone towers in the city, A GDA official told TOI that the figure has been arrived at following a survey by the Authority across all the eight zones of the city. "All these mobile phone towers have been installed without the clearance of the civic agency and in blatant violation of department of telecommunications (DoT) norms," the official said, on condition of anonymity MUMBAI: After months of delay, the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation has uploaded a list of illegal mobile towers on its website, for the citizens to view. The civic body has uploaded the list of the illegal towers along with their addresses. The list put up by the BMC shows that there are a total 4,776 mobile towers in the city, of which 3,628 are illegal. xxv. As shown above there is wide spread non compliance of guide lines cross India and the scenario is much worse in smaller towns where there is no monitoring at all. The problem of illegal tower also emanates from fact that the TREM cells monitoring and compliance has failed and therefore illegal towers are coming up unchecked. That is because the TERM cells is not equipped with funds and man power to carry out their obligation as per the guidelines, further the TERM Cells xxvi. centers have been set up only in 34 cities across India. Respondent No 2 TRAI has reported that presently there are 7,36,654 towers across India and teledensity is close to one billion taking the teledensity ratio to 79.78%, and is expected to cross 1.3 million within short period of time, requiring additional one lac towers. The guidelines provide for only 10% compliance monitoring, which means that out of 7.4 lac towers that exist only ten percent i.e. 7.4 thousand are mandated to be checked for compliance and even these ten percent are also not xxvii. being monitor. Careful reading of the DoT 2013 guide lines will reveal that apart from lowering of the power levels from 4.5mhz to 0.45 mhz suggested by Inter-ministerial Committee, DoT has not incorporated any other recommendation which were suggested by the Inter-ministerial Committee in the larger public interest. In fact the guide lines are more in the interest of the telecomoperators in pursuance of installing more and more towers at the xxviii. earliest. The public interest has been largely over looked. That the fact that a high powered committee after examining large number of studies pointing towards strong possibilities of harmful effect of radiation adopted precautionary principles in their recommendations and by not adopting the recommendations the DoT has miserably failed in its public xxix. duty . Looking at the threat to humans, animals and environment from radiation and considering the strong possibility of serious health hazards from radiation from towers in the public interest it is absolutely necessary to mandate 100% monitoring by term cells xxx. or any such independent third party. The guide lines providing for self certification is also against the public policy of India, as the possibility of false certification cannot be ruled out, more in the fact that at a conservative estimate 50% towers are illegal and of 50 % that may be legal 25% operators have failed to certify the radiation levels as per the prescribed norms and have not been proceeded against as per the mandate of the DoT guidelines. This is leading to very serious fall out of undetected high levels of radiation beyond xxxi. permissible limits. There is an urgent need for the self certification regime to be replaced with third party certification, may be at the cost of the operator and be combined with hundred percent compliance monitoring . xxxii. That the 2013 guide lines are completely silent on the permissible areas for location of towers, where as the inter ministerial committee had given very strong recommendation with the regard to locations of towers also various courts in India have issued directions to the effect that the cell towers should not be located in residential areas, near schools, hospitals and parks; distance between two towers should not be less than 1 km etc. Total combined radiation levels of multiple and /shared towers cannot exceed the 2012 permissible limit. None of these finds any mention in the 2013 guidelines. Currently installation of towers is haphazard, large numbers of towers are in very close vicinity of each other, at certain buildings and locations there are four to six towers together with multiple antennas violating the permissible limit norm, sharing of towers is also causing violation of permissible limits, as each operator, even if follows permissible limit, but combined strength becomes much higher, saturating certain areas with very high xxxiii. density of radiation. It is also suspected that communications carriers exceed exposure limits. Once equipment is installed and inspections are completed, it can be cranked up to create wider coverage. But there is no provision for on-site monitoring of cellular antennas for compliance with RF radiation standards. This was also xxxiv. observed by the inter-ministerial committee The guidelines also mandate state level/district level local telecom committees, to monitor installation related formalities and to handle local level grievance redressal. But most municipalities have not complied with it as these are just guidelines and not binding on states and local bodies. .It is up to states/municipalities/panchayats to apply own wisdom and xxxv. frame rules, which un-fortunately has not been done till now. As a result installation of towers across India to very large extent is in violation of the norms /guide lines framed by DoT. Due to inadequate regulatory infrastructure and which needs well thought out redressal for the larger benefit of public at xxxvi. large and petitioners in particular. In addition to studies conducted by inter-ministerial committee In September of 2010, the MoEF established a 10-member committee under Bombay Natural History Society (BNHS) with director Asad Rahmani to study the impact of cell phone towers on birds and bees which are conclusive and have bees so all over the world  Effect on Birds and Bees The group of experts reviewed 919 studies performed in India and abroad regarding the effects of cellphone towers on birds, insects, animals, wildlife, and humans. What the group found was quite startling. Of the 919 studies, a staggering 593 showed the negative impact of mobile towers on birds, bees, humans, wildlife and plants.  Studies say EMRs have adverse impact on bees sparking an unusual phenomenon called colony collapse disorder. The radiations from mobile phones interfere with bees' navigation system, preventing them from finding their way back to their hives. When a cell phone was kept near a beehive, the worker bees were unable to return, leaving the hives with only the queens and eggs and resulting in the collapse of the colony within ten days.  Scientists have found the cause of the world’s sudden dwindling population of bees. Research conducted in Lausanne, Switzerland has shown that the signal from cell phones not only confuses bees, but also may lead to their death. Over 83 experiments have yielded the same results. With virtually most of the population of the United States (and the rest of the world) owning cell phones, the impact has been greatly noticeable.  Observations also show that number of bats, birds, butterflies near mobile towers has gone down due to radiation effect, Ornithologist Maruti Chitampalli's assertion about EMR affecting birds. Chitampalli, who is one of the first to voice concern on radiation, said, "We've been saying this for a long time. Radiations affect all kinds of birds. They affect sparrows in the cities and obstruct migratory birds in their flight.  One of the studies carried out by Centre for Environment and Vocational Studies, Punjab, 50 eggs of house sparrows were exposed to EMR for 5-10 minutes. It was found that all the xxxvi. August 2015 standing committee of on telecom tabled its report in the Parliament. The Committee expressed concern that all the standards of radiation limit which the government has chosen to follow are based on the researches conducted in western countries where conditions are very different from countries like India. Some of the specific differences between western countries and India are low population density, cold climatic conditions, low density of mobile phone towers etc. The Committee also noted that DoT has acknowledged that some of the India specific conditions, such as, multi-operator scenario, mobile phone usage, higher population density etc, have been conveyed to WHO for their considerations in carrying out with India specific research. Against this backdrop, the Committee are not convinced with contention of DoT that none of the studies done under the aegis of the WHO had proved that the emissions from the mobile phone towers/networks are causing harmful effect on human beings as the same are not based on India specific research. The Committee finds it deplorable that some of the India specific research carried out by eminent scientists and other Governmental organizations have not been taken into consideration by DoT in forming its guidelines. For instance, a 10 year study conducted by Prof. Gandhi of Department of Genetics, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar has found that radiations emitted from the towers are degenerating DNA and chromosomes. Similarly, a study conducted by Prof. Jitendra Behari in Jawaharlal Nehru has found that the exposure to radiation from mobile towers and mobile phones could have an adverse impact on male fertility and deplete the defense mechanism of cells. Also the Environment and Forest Ministry study has blamed electromagnetic radiation from communication towers for the declining number of sparrows and bees, etc. The Committee, in view of the above findings made by the reputed experts and research institutes, feel that there is no room for complacency on the issue by selectively relying only on the findings of WHO whose research reports are mainly based on developed countries and strongly recommend that the findings of India specific studies should also be taken into consideration by DoT in xxxvii. coming out with its policy initiative on mobile towers. The Committee also noted that the main challenge involved in conducting studies on radiation hazards from mobile towers and mobile handsets is the requirement of very long period of scientific research on targeted population and the lack of established standard procedures and protocols to study and monitor the EMF impacts on humans and wildlife. The Committee are, however, concerned to note that in spite of exponential growth of mobile telephony in the country over the last decade, no efforts have been made by the Department to undertake a continuous or long term research on the issue. It is rather surprising to note that even though the Department of Telecommunications is the nodal Department for all telecommunication related issues, it is only the Department of Science and Technology which on the direction of Prime Minister’s Office has constituted a Committee under Dr. N.K. Ganguly, former Director General (ICMR) on 1.10.2012 to examine the harmful effects from Mobile towers on the population living in the vicinity and for developing the frame of reference for calling out Request For Proposals (RFPs) for scientific assessment of health hazards and adverse impact on ecology. The Committee feels that DoT should be more sensitive and proactive in discharging its prime responsibility on such critical matters. The Committee, therefore, strongly recommend that the DoT must wholeheartedly associate itself with such long term research works being carried out within the country and also make regular budgetary allocation under a separate budget head of expenditure for research on health xxxviii. hazards from EMF radiation. That in addition to the aforementioned an compilation can be made available to as it the court at the time of arguments, which presents over whelming evidence supporting the view that RF/EMR is harmful for the human body and has a very serious and critical link to cancer causing factors, the studies reveal that certain people are more susceptible than others, based on their duration of exposure, individual genetics, age and heath indexes. Though most studies have concluded that they failed to establish direct link and that being probably the limitation on studies conducted so far which lacked the highly developed scientific methods to establish a conclusive link. But at the same time these pointed to some possibility of connection which cannot be ignored and necessitates adoption of precautionary principles to minimize exposure and creation of a national level all inclusive mandatory legal procedure which needs to be xxxix. implemented in totality. That it is also important to mention here the studies which have established direct connection to severe depletion in numbers of birds and bees due to effect of RF/EMR on birds, bees, butterflies, rats and other such animal and plants and cannot be ignored because human dependency on plants and animal is well established, even International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) says that it is not only interdependency but xl. total dependency. That in this context, it is important to mention that India is a signatory to the international convention to protect plants and animals. It will also not be out place to mention here that birds and bees form an integral link in the environment and food chain/ life cycle. It is a well known fact that 80% of pollination is caused by bees and birds their extinction is bound to affect human life loss of food production, the apple farmers in the hill have now resorted to importing bees to felicitate natural pollination as bees have disappeared from these area. xli. That since the beginning of the wireless revolution, there has been no state funded studies to determine the impact of constantly escalating levels of radiation on public health. Most people remain blissfully unaware of their proximity to towers and transmitters. They are also unaware of their levels of exposure in their workplaces where wireless transmitters may xlii. be located just a few feet away from them. That the Petitioner further submits that under Art 21 of the Constitution of India every citizen of India is entitled to full and complete information of every aspect with regard to the radiation levels in the environment that they live in, in order make informed choices. It has been stated here in above that the current monitoring and information systems are grossly inadequate and therefore counterproductive. Currently no information is available in public domain for public consumption though all this information is available with service providers and they have a bounden duty to share it with public at large. Hence certain new regulations pertaining to public information system, also recommended by the interministerial committee, at the city level with regard to location of each mobile tower, their radiation levels and other information necessary to determine the full compliance of all the existing norms, including third party certification instead of self certification is a must and is a valuable right of every individual under Article 21and prays for Creation of national data base with the information of all the base station, their emission levels xliii. and display on public domain for public information. That the inter-ministerial committee has also recommended that there is a need to evolve the alternative means to deploy mobile telecom network based on best International practices. Low power cellular base station would require much smaller exclusion zone than existing cells and Use of such transmitters xliv. inside cities will decrease the amount of radiated power. That the Respondent’s failed to enact adequate and proper guide lines, even though they were recommended by the interministerial committee and have deliberately ignored the evidence available connecting the serious health hazards to radiation from mobile and mobile towers. Preferred to frame guide lines in support of telecom operators rather than keeping a balance, to derive unjust profit at the expense of life and health of innocent citizens, turned a blind eye to harmful/non-thermal effects of electromagnetic radiation/ radio frequency radiation on human health and have consciously and illegally deprived the petitioner of his right to life as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution, thus, amenable to directions of the Hon’ble xlv. Court. Hence, the present petition. That the petitioner has not filed any other writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India before this Hon’ble Court or any other court for similar relief sought in the present Writ xlvi. Petition. That this Hon’ble Court has the jurisdiction to entertain, try and dispose of the present Writ Petition. xlvii. That the petitioner is having no other alternative and effective means but to approach this Hon'ble Court by way of filing the instant Writ Petition before this Hon'ble Court, inter alia, on the following grounds: GROUNDS A. Because the respondents have collectively infringed valuable rights of the petitioner by installing illegal multiple antenna BTS in the adjoining house and not removing the same despite repeated complaints. B. Because the 1 Respondent, the 2 Respondent and the 3 st nd rd Respondent failed to seal the tower in question despite the complaint/legal notice dated 27-11-2013 and 28 -01- 2014 by of the petitioners employers stating that the tower violates distance and radiation parameters. C. Because the Respondent No. 1 even after inspection failed to provide exact configuration of the tower to satisfy the concerns of the petitioner. D. Because the principle of restitution shall be available to the petitioner. E. Because the Respondent No. 1 has miserably failed to fully enforce its own guide lines of 2013 in relation to mobile towers. Resulting in large no of illegal towers, violating the norms prescribed in this behalf. F. Because the illegal towers are grave threat to public at large due to higher than prescribed radiation. G. Because the Respondents have failed to fulfill their Constitutional obligation/public duty of curbing illegal tower due lack of proper monitoring mechanism as also noted by the parliamentary committee. H. Because the current guidelines of the Respondent No. 1 are inadequate to protect public at large from the EMR radiation the to frame proper and sufficient legal frame work to protect citizens of India from harmful effect of RF/EMR in wake of strong possibility of radiation being harm full.. I. Because the guidelines being in the nature of guide lines are not amenable to statutory enforcement. J. Because these guidelines are still not adopted / followed by the different states and local authorities and continue have endanger environment, human and animal health. K. Because the data shows that 50 to 90 % towers are illegal and without any valid permissions due to the failure of respondent to frame well thought out and proper legal and regulatory mechanism. L. Because the frame works is grossly inadequate to deal with large no towers, there are existing 7 lacs plus towers and close to 1 billion mobile users spread across length and breadth of India and needs corresponding large infrastructure to monitor it. M. Because DoT has deliberately failed to grant sufficient funds and infrastructure for proper compliance monitoring of towers by TERM cells resulting completely failure of compliance monitoring mechanism. N. Because the compliance monitoring of 10% towers in wake of serious possibility of adverse health impact, is grossly in adequate. O. Because the regulation providing for self certification of radiation levels by service provider is against the public policy of India. P. Because the provision of self certification can be misused by the service provider to the detriment of the petitioner and public at large. Q. Because third party certification is of utmost importance to ensure proper compliance of norms. R. Because the respondent has committed grave disservice by not adopting /incorporating the recommendations of its own ineterministerial committee and casts very serious aspersion on their bona fide and intention . S. Because despite clear cut recommendation by the interministerial committee for installing towers away from residential areas, schools and hospitals the Dot continues to not to enact guide lines in support of the said recommendation. T. Because the citizens of India have constitutional right under Article 21 to have full and complete information in public domain on mobile towers around them. U. Because in the wake of strong possibility of EMR radiation even at reduced levels causing serious disease like cancer precautionary principles need to be invoked by this Hon’ble court, in the interest of public at large and the petitioner. PRAYER For the facts and circumstances as aforestated, the Petitioner herein most respectfully submits that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to: a. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby directing the Respondent No. 5 to immediately remove its tower from the locality where the petitioner is residing. b. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby directing all the Respondents to make reparation upon the principle of restitution and pay compensation in terms of money and life time treatment to the petitioner. c. Direct the Respondent to follow the recommendations issued by the Inter-ministerial Committee approved by the Govt. of India. d. Direct Respondents on precautionary principle that towers operating for long periods of time should not be made to operate in one area for more than a year; e. Direct the Respondent that self certification by operators as a means of enforcement should be amended to certification by independent agency, for better implementation of norms; f. Pass an order for enforcing of uniform guidelines having statutory force across India. AND/ OR g. Pass such other order (s)/direction (s), as may be necessary to protect the rights of the Petitioner and further the cause being espoused by the Petitioner may be passed. New Delhi AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS PETITIONERS AS IN DUTY BOUND SHALL EVER PRAY. DRAWN & FILED BY: DRAWN ON: FILED ON: .05.2016 .05.2016 [ ] ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) I.A NO. OF 2016 IN WRIT PETITION (C) NO.___________OF 2016 IN THE MATTER OF: Harish Chand Tiwari & Anr. … Petitioners …. Respondents Versus Union of India & 3 Ors. APPLICATION FOR STAY/DIRECTIONS TO THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INIDA AND HIS COMPANION JUDGES OF THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA THE HUMBLE PETITION OF THE PETITIONERS ABOVENAMED MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH 1. The petitioner had filed the above Writ Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, seeking …… as being in violation of the fundamental rights of the Petitioner under Articles 21 of the Constitution of India. 2. In this context, it is submitted that the 1 Respondent has st failed to fulfill in their Constitutional obligation/public duty to frame proper and sufficient legal frame work to protect citizens of India from harmful effect of RF/EMR despite over whelming scientific evidence connecting EMR from mobile towers to serious health hazards. Considering the strong possibility of EMR radiation causing serious disease like cancer, precautionary principles need to be invoked by this Hon’ble court in totality in the interest of public at large and the Petitioner. 3. That the Petitioner further submits that under Art 21 of the Constitution of India every citizen of India is entitled to full and complete information of every aspect with regard to the radiation levels in the environment that they live in, in order make informed choices. The current monitoring and information systems are grossly inadequate and therefore counterproductive. Currently no information is available in public domain for public consumption though all this information is available with service providers and they have a bounden duty to share it with public at large. Hence certain new regulations pertaining to public information system at the city level with regard to location of each mobile tower, their radiation levels and other information necessary to determine the full compliance of all the existing norms, including third party certification instead of self certification is a must and is a valuable right of every individual under Article 21. 4. That the Petitioner is 42 years of age, having two small school going children, wife and dependent parents. He could not even afford huge treatment cost and the same was borne by his employers. Petitioner’s illness and treatment has left him weak and lacking in strength and much reduced working ability. Today along with him, his whole family is also at risk of the disease and the Petitioner has no other option but to approach this Hon’ble Court for its kind indulgence to save and rescue him. 5. That the Petitioner further submits that it is in the interest of justice, equity and good conscience that pending the hearing and final disposal of the Writ Petition, the Respondents by themselves, their servants and agents be directed to pay compensation in terms of money and life time treatment to the Petitioner. 6. This Hon’ble Court has jurisdiction to entertain, try and dispose of the present Writ Petition. PRAYER In the circumstances, it is most humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to; i. Pass orders to remove the mobile tower which is within 50 meters of petitioners’ residence, pending the hearing and final disposal of the Writ Petition; AND ii. Pass such other Orders as may be deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case. FOR WHICH ACT OF KINDNESS, THE PETITIONER SHALL AS IN DUTY BOUNDE EVER PRAY. DRAWN & FILED BY: DRAWN ON: .05.2016 FILED ON: .05.2016 [ ] ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL WRIT JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO_________OF 2016 IN THE MATTER OF: Harish Chand Tiwari …Petitioner Versus Union of India & Ors. … Respondents INDEX S. NO. PARTICULARS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Office report on limitation Listing Proforma Synopsis and List of Dates Writ Petition with affidavit ANNEXURE – P /1 : The Color photographs of the Mobile Tower 6. installed by the BSNL Company. ANNEXURE – P /2 : True copy of the medical reports dated 7. 25.10.13 ANNEXURE – P /3: True copy of the medical reports dated 13-11- 8. 2013 ANNEXURE – P/ 4 : Copy of Lab Test Report of Rajive Gandhi 9. research institute. ANNEXURE – P /5 : Copy of chemo therapy prescription dated 05.03.15 of Cancer Hospital and Research 10. institute. ANNEXURE – P/ 6 : Copy of Nuclear health care LTD date 15.12.2015 PAGE NO. 11. ANNEXURE – P /7 : The true copy of letter dated 07.10.2013 by 12. Sh. Anil Sharma ANNEXURE – P /8 : True copy of the legal notice dated --- issued 13. to the Respondent Authorities ANNEXURE – P/9 : True copy of the reply notice dated 14. 21.01.2014 of the Respondent no. 2. ANNEXURE – P/10 : True copy of the reply notice dated 15. 08.02.2014 of the Respondent no. 4. ANNEXURE – P/11 : Copy of report of the Inter Ministerial Committee on EMF Radiation. 16. ANNEXURE – P/12 : The true typed copy of guidelines dated 17. 30.08.2010 issued by the Govt. of India. ANNEXURE – P/13 : The true typed copy of Guidelines dated 20. 23.08.2012 issued by the Govt. of India. ANNEXURE – P/ 14: The true typed copy of modified guidelines 21. issued by the Govt. of India dated 01.08.2013 I.A No. of 2016 22. Vakalatnama