JUDGMENT : A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J. 1. This appeal is filed against the judgment of the learned single Judge in W.P. (C) No. 28273 of 2019 by which, direction had been issued to the Secretary of the Panchayat to consider the application of the 1st respondent in accordance with law and after following due procedure including an opportunity of being heard to the respective parties and to take a final decision. 2. Writ petition was filed by M/s. ATC Telecom Infrastructure (P) Ltd. challenging Exts.P4 and P5 decisions of the Panchayat by which, the application for permit to construct and erect a Telecommunication Tower has been deferred and direction had been issued to approach the District Telecom Authority (DTC) to get the clearance. 3. This appeal is filed by respondents 6 to 9 in the writ petition inter alia contending that while disposing of the writ petition as stated supra, the learned single Judge did not take note of the judgment of the Division Bench of this court in Indus Towers Ltd. vs. Sub-Inspector of Police, 2014 (4) KLT 306 in which it was clearly held that any dispute relating to erection of a Telecommunication Tower requires to be considered and adjudicated by the DTC and only thereafter appropriate measures can be taken for effecting construction. 4. But apparently this is a case in which the petitioner/1st respondent herein challenged the order passed by the Panchayat, relegating the parties to the DTC without even granting a permit. It is settled law that when an application is submitted to the Panchayat seeking permit, the application has to be considered by the Secretary of the Panchayat and the said authority alone can pass appropriate orders. In the case on hand, the Secretary had referred the matter to the Committee and the Committee decided that the matter should be placed before the DTC before considering the application for building permit. As far as the objection raised by the appellants herein are concerned, already an opportunity had been granted to the appellants to raise their grievances before the Secretary. Even otherwise only when a permit is granted, the right to make construction arises. In such an event, it shall be open for any party, as the case may be, if he is aggrieved by such a decision, to take up the matter before the DTC and seek interference. Even otherwise only when a permit is granted, the right to make construction arises. In such an event, it shall be open for any party, as the case may be, if he is aggrieved by such a decision, to take up the matter before the DTC and seek interference. DTC has the power as provided under Ext.P6 Government Order and take appropriate steps in the matter. 5. Having regard to those factual aspects, we do not find that any error has been committed by the learned single Judge in issuing the impugned order. We do not find any grounds to interfere. The right of respondents 6 to 9 to approach the DTC is kept open. The writ appeal is dismissed.