Dismissed

D.Ramesh v. Chief Secretary to Government

Madras HC1 Oct 2021WP/16305/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Madras disposed of two writ petitions filed under Article 226 seeking mandamus to remove unauthorized banners and flex boards on public spaces in Puducherry. The Court noted that authorities had taken the offending structures down promptly and found no rational basis to the petitioners' apprehension that action was political.

What did the court decide?

The writs seeking direction to remove unauthorized banners and hoardings are disposed of as no further action is called for.

D.Ramesh Vs Chief Secretary to Government — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 01.10.2021

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.SANJIB BANERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU

¶7

WP NOS.16305 AND 17743 OF 2021
WP No.16305 of 2021:
D.Ramesh

¶8

..Petitioner

¶9

vs.
1. Chief Secretary to Government,
 Chief Secretariat,
 Goubert Avenue,
 Puducherry – 605 001.
2. The District Collector,
 O/o. The District Collector,
 1-Floor, New Collectorate Building,
 Vazhudavoor Road,
 Pettaiyan Chathiram,
 Puducherry – 605 009.
3. Director General of Police (DGP),
 O/o. Director General of Police (DGP),
 No.4, Dumas Street,
 Puducherry – 605 001.
..Respondents
WP No.17743 of 2021:
V.Velmurugan

¶10

..Petitioner

¶11

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶12

`vs.` `1. Union of India,` `rep. by the Chief Secretary,` `Goubert Avenue,` `Beach Road, White Town,` `Puducherry – 605 001.`
`2. The District Magistrate cum District Collector,` `Puducherry District,` `Puducherry.`
`3. The Chief Engineer,` `Public Works Department,` `Central Office,` `No.34, Lal Bahadhur Street,` `Puducherry – 605 101.`
`4. The Senior Superintendent of Police (Traffic),` `Office of the Superintendent of Police,` `Police Department,` `Puducherry.`
`5. The Commissioner,` `Puducherry Municipality,` `Puducherry.`
`6. The Commissioner,` `Oulgaret Municipality,` `Jawahar Nagar,` `Reddiyar Palayam,` `Puducherry.` `..Respondents`
`Prayer: WP No.16305 of 2021 filed under Article 226 of the` `Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus` `directing the concerned authorities/police to remove the`
`unauthorized erection of Flex Banners, Flex Boards, Hoardings,` `Archers, Cutouts and Pasting of Posters and Fixing of Thatty` `Boards on the public roads, passages and pedestrial platforms` `without the permission from the competent authorities within the` `Union Territory of Puducherry, disfiguring the serent atmosphere` `of Puducherry immediately and initiate appropriate legal action`

¶13

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶14

against the violators of Puducherry Municipalities Act, 1973 and
The Puducherry Open Places (Prevention of Disfigurement) Act,
2009 to safeguard the interest of general public and to maintain
the Rule of Law.

¶15

WP No.17743 of 2021 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the
respondents to take necessary and immediate action against the
unauthorized and illegally erected banners/hoardings/flex
Boards/Cut outs/posters in contravention of law forthwith.

¶16

For the Petitioner :Mr.S.Xavier Felix
in WP No.16305/2021

¶17

For the Petitioner
in WP No.17743/2021

¶18

Mr.P.Dinesh Kumar

¶19

For the Respondents:Mr.J.Kumaran
in both WPsAddl. Government Pleader
(Puducherry)

¶20

COMMON ORDER

¶21

(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)

¶22

In view of the status report dated September 30, 2021 and
the apparent action taken by the Government of the Union
Territory of Puducherry to take down the offending festoons,
banners and the like within a short time, no further action is
called for.

¶23

2. The petitioners apprehend that the prompt action in
these cases may have been since the local body elections are
round the corner. The petitioners say that once such elections
are over, things may return to the usual with cutouts, buntings
and the like from which politicians stare down at the passing
citizens.

¶24

3. There does not appear to be any rational basis to the
petitioners' apprehension. However, if what the petitioners
apprehend turns out to be true, there is no stopping the
petitioners from approaching the court once again.

¶25

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶26

4. W.P.Nos.16305 and 17743 of 2021 are disposed of.
W.M.P.Nos.18919 and 18920 of 2021 are closed.

¶27

There will be no order as to costs.

¶28

Sd/-

¶29

Assistant Registrar(CS-VII)

¶30

// True Copy //

¶31

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶32

sasi

¶33

To:

¶34

1. The Chief Secretary to Government,
 Chief Secretariat,
 Goubert Avenue,
 Puducherry – 605 001.

¶35

2. The District Collector,
 O/o. The District Collector,
 1-Floor, New Collectorate Building,
 Vazhudavoor Road,
 Pettaiyan Chathiram,
 Puducherry – 605 009.

¶36

3. The Director General of Police (DGP),
 O/o. Director General of Police (DGP),
 No.4, Dumas Street,
 Puducherry – 605 001.

¶37

4. The Chief Engineer,
 Public Works Department,
 Central Office,
 No.34, Lal Bahadhur Street,
 Puducherry – 605 101.

¶38

5. The Senior Superintendent of Police (Traffic),
 Office of the Superintendent of Police,
 Police Department, Puducherry.

¶39

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶40

6. The Commissioner,
 Puducherry Municipality,
 Puducherry.

¶41

7. The Commissioner,
 Oulgaret Municipality,
 Jawahar Nagar, Reddiyar Palayam,
 Puducherry.

¶42

+1cc to Mr.S.Xavier Felix, Advocate, S.R.No.51366

¶43

+1cc to the Government Pleader, Puducherry, High Court, Madras,
S.R.No.51457 and 51460

¶44

WP Nos.16305 and 17735 of 2021

¶45

VG-II(CO)
RLP(07/10/2021)

¶46

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

D.Ramesh v. Chief Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D.Ramesh v. Chief Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C.Augustin Jebaraj Vs the Authorised Officer

Itc Ltd. Vs Reckitt Benckiser (India) Pvt. Ltd.

Mr.Kanakaraja Vs The Authorized Officer

Sivesh Varshan @ Sivakumar, Vs The High Court of Judicature

Maximus Arc Ltd. Vs Sri Devi Karumariamman Educational Trust

M/S.Macro Marvel Projects Limited Vs J. Vengatesh