Ponteland ward members on Northumberland County Council are calling for the authority to write to the Government asking for it to take away the prospect of a 12.5m mast being allowed near the 450-pupil Darras Hall First School.

Telefonica O2's bid caused great opposition among local residents, but it gained permitted development rights by default and it still has the option to use it despite agreeing to look for an alternative location.

Although the site was rejected by Northumberland County Council's West Planning Committee, the company was legally allowed to use it because the application had not been presented to the committee within the 56-day statutory deadline.

Despite being told by planning officers and a council solicitor that an 'Article 4' direction to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government requesting the removal of the rights is unlikely to succeed, councillors still believe it is worth doing.

Coun Veronica Jones, who represents Ponteland West, handed in a petition calling for the direction and against the O2 proposal which totalled about 1,800 signatures.

"This is an officer error so it's not up to the residents to correct it, it's up to the council," she said.

"If these rights are not taken away it will always be in the background concerning residents because another company could come in and use the site instead of O2."

And Ponteland South with Heddon member Peter Jackson, Leader of the Conservative group, said: "We have been round the houses on the issue for a number of months now and the reason we have brought this up is to get some action."

Following a silent protest by hundreds of residents and pressure from the local county councillors, MPs and MEPs, O2 agreed not to build the mast on the site in Broadway, Darras Hall.

The residents' committee set up to oppose the bid also urged the West Planning Committee, which will make the decision at its next meeting on April 8, to back the Ponteland councillors.

Member David Styles said at the West Area Committee meeting: "I'm not a gambling man, but if something is difficult to do I don't back away from it and this issue is too important to ignore so I'm glad our local councillors are also taking this line."

He said legal advice the group had taken said the county council could revoke the rights itself but Peter Biggers, the authority's Head of Development Management and Building Control, said it could only do so if there was full planning permission in place.

"My concern is that we would be using the wrong tool for the job," added Mr Biggers.

"Article 4 is very much about a specific threat to the amenity of the area so we believe it would be unlikely to succeed."

The article mainly covers sites in conservation areas or those that include listed buildings, which do not apply in this case.

But applications can be made even if the site does not contain such buildings and is not in a conservation area.

The protesters have said there is evidence in different countries about mobile phone masts causing health problems, but O2 says many scientific studies have found no evidence that they pose a health risk.