Illegal Hoardings: Karnataka HC Directs BBMP, Bangalore Development Authority To Initiate Action Against Erring Officers

A division bench of Chief Justice Prasana B Varale and Justice Ashok S Kinagi has called for the report to be submitted by March 6. In doing so it observed “Even after more than 3 years of issuance of a circular (by the police department) instead of there being curtailment on erection of hoardings and flexes in public places the illegal erection of hoarding/flexes is rampant and on rise.”

The report by the respondents has to address the following points:

1: Whether there was any periodical check to see that erection of illegal hoardings is prevented, if not who are the responsible officers, for failure in their duty.?

2: Whether the superior officer of respondent authorities have issued any circular communication to their subordinate officers in view of earlier directions of the court.?

3: If any action is initiated against illegal hoardings the details of such action be provided.?

4: If such action is not initiated till date the authorities of respondents BBMP and BDA to initiate action in pursuance of circular dated 7th feb 20202—namely registration of FIR against offenders, and complete the same within 3 weeks from today.

5: In case senior officers of respondent BBMP and BDA find that there was dereliction of duties by subordinate officers the necessary action be initiated against such erring officers and details be provided to this court.

In giving the above direction the court took into consideration the submission made by Amicus curiae Senior Advocate Vikram Huilgol that though there were various orders passed by the court, respondent state as well as BBMP equally failed to follow these directions.

Further, it was said “As per BBMP Outdoors Signages and Public Messages bye-laws of 2018, exhaustive provisions are made for regulating placement of signages and hoardings but in reality there are clear violations of these bye laws and various political signages have been displayed across the city. Whether a necessary requisite permission is sought for as per the provision of bye laws, is not made note.”

He added “There are provisions for penal action against violators but it seems that respondent BBMP is maintaining a silence on this aspect also. In the written submission only by way of illustration it was submitted that a massive hoarding has been noticed abutting the Hebbal flyover.”

The court also took note of the memo filed by Advocate G R Mohan appearing for petitioner Mayige Goda wherein it cited various photographs showing various hoardings in the different areas of Bangalore city.

The bench said “Admittedly all areas are busy areas and there is constant traffic in these areas. Bare perusal of photographs shows that some of the hoardings are causing obstruction to traffic movement.”

The petitioner also relied on the circular issued by the State of Karnataka through Director General and Inspector General of Police, wherein a reference is made to section 3 of Karnataka Open Places (Prevention of Disfigurement) Act of 1981 and it is stated that in case advertisements are erected or exhibited in any place open to public view without permission from local authority criminal law must be set in motion.

The matter will be next heard on March 7.

Case Title: Mayige Gowda And State of Karnataka

Case No: W.P. NO. 57990 OF 2017