It was too late in the day for the Madras High Court to crack down on unauthorised flex boards erected across the city for the valedictory of former Chief Minister M.G. Ramachandran’s centenary celebrations on Sunday. Yet, after holding a special hearing in the morning, the court wanted to know what penal action had been initiated against the violators.
Justices S. Manikumar and Subramonium Prasad directed the officials concerned to file an affidavit by October 8 listing out the action taken against all those who had put up flex boards in the city without prior permission. The direction was issued on a public interest litigation petition moved urgently by activist ‘Traffic’ K.R. Ramaswamy.
The activist had approached Chief Justice Vijaya Kamlesh Tahilramani on Saturday evening and obtained permission for filing the case on a holiday. Though the case was numbered late in the day, the papers could not be served in advance at the Government Pleader’s office. Therefore, the matter got listed for hearing before the Division Bench only on Sunday morning.
During the course of hearing, Additional Advocate General S.R. Rajagopal informed the Bench that permission had been granted for the erection of 446 flex boards in the city for the valedictory function.
Since it was a State government-organised function, permission had been granted to government officials too to erect three flex boards between the airport and Kathipara junction (Zone-12). Further, 279 flex boards had been permitted between Nandanam (the venue of the function) and Anna flyover which fell under Zone-9 of Greater Chennai Corporation, the court was told.
The written permissions clearly stated that the flex boards could be displayed only for four days, between September 27 and 30, and the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies (Permission for Erection of Digital Banners and Placards) Rules, 2011, should be scrupulously followed.
‘3 boards identified’
It was made clear in the written permissions that no flex board should be erected in front of educational institutions, places of worship, hospitals and in road corners. A copy of one such permission granted to an applicant was also submitted before the court to point out the conditions that had been imposed while granting permission.
The AAG, however, conceded that some “enthusiastic” followers of the former Chief Minister had erected flex boards without permission and the Corporation had formed committees to identify such boards.
The committees identified three unauthorised boards in Zone-9, 17 in Zone-12 and 20 in Zone 13 and all of them were removed by those who had erected the boards.
After recording his submissions, the judges said, Section 326E of the Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act of 1919 states: “Any hoarding erected without a licence shall be confiscated and removed by the Corporation Commissioner without giving any notice.” Therefore, they directed the official to discharge his duty in letter and spirit if any more flex boards had to be removed.
Further, referring to Section 326I of the Act which states that any person who contravenes its provisions could be punished with imprisonment for a term that may extend up to three years or with fine up to ₹10,000 or both, the judges wanted to know what action had been taken against the violators who had erected unauthorised flex boards in the city.
