https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278330 Rooftop cellular towers were treated as "buildings" under municipal law because they are permanent metallic structures affecting the realty and urban environment, so municipal permission was required for installation. The Delhi HC held that municipal regulation may extend to safety, aesthetics, skyline control and orderly urban management, and that the Telegraph Act does not exclude such local regulation where it does not intrude into the exclusive field of establishing or working telegraphs. However, the corporation could not sustain a separate tower fee without a lawful charging provision, and the priority-of-site condition was also struck down. Building-related safety conditions were upheld. en-us Fri, 29 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 25 Jan 2019 11:52:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278330 Rooftop cellular towers were treated as "buildings" under municipal law because they are permanent metallic structures affecting the realty and urban environment, so municipal permission was required for installation. The Delhi HC held that municipal regulation may extend to safety, aesthetics, skyline control and orderly urban management, and that the Telegraph Act does not exclude such local regulation where it does not intrude into the exclusive field of establishing or working telegraphs. However, the corporation could not sustain a separate tower fee without a lawful charging provision, and the priority-of-site condition was also struck down. Building-related safety conditions were upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 29 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278330