- (1.) In these proceedings, which have been filed in public interest, the petitioner has sought the following directions: "(i) a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite party No. 3 to writ petition to stop granting permission for organizing Dharna, protests at Shaheed Smarak, forthwith. (ii) a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to take adequate steps for shifting of Dharna Sthal from Shaheed Smarak to some other suitable place in the outskirts of the Lucknow City at an earliest. (iii) a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties for providing adequate safety measures, medical aid and other facilities during the course of Dharna, protests etc., if any, is being organized under the permission of administration. (iv) a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to take adequate steps for implementation of provisions of 'Prevention of Damage to Public Properties Act, 1984' in regard to fixing liability of damage to public property on the political party or its leader as caused during the course of Dharna, demonstrations etc." During the course of hearing, yesterday, we had requested the learned Standing Counsel to take instructions as to whether the State Government has been granting any permission for organizing Dharnas and protests at Shaheed Smarak. Learned Standing Counsel has taken instructions and has stated before the Court that no permissions are being granted by the State Government for organizing Dharnas and protests at Shaheed Smarak, having regard to the serious difficulties, which are faced on the occasion of such Dharnas and protests resulting in dislocation of traffic and inconvenience to the residents of the City. Our attention has also been drawn by the learned Standing Counsel to the earlier order of this Court passed in the present proceedings on 20.12.2010. In that order, this Court had indicated reasons as to why the Shaheed Smarak is not an appropriate place for assembling of a large gathering, observing as follows: "We also feel that Shaheed Smarak is not an appropriate place where such a large gathering should be allowed to be assembled for showing their protest against any action of the Government or any other person or authority, as it intrudes upon the sanctity of the memorial. Apart from this, we find that when such protests are lodged, the roads adjacent and in front of Shaheed Smarak are blocked by the demonstrators, causing great inconvenience to the running traffic.'' Accordingly, the Bench directed the State Government to consider the matter at the earliest having regard to the following situations: "Let the matter be considered at the earliest by the State Government, as we take notice of the fact that during protests, inconvenience caused to the public cannot be compensated nor it can be ignored. Instances are many in number, when the ailing person could not reach the hospital, persons could not reach to work places on time. Besides, candidates may not reach the office for interview, students may miss their examinations and trains and flights are missed, therefore, if necessary, an appropriate scheme be framed and effective measures be taken in this regard."
(2.) Learned Standing Counsel has now stated before the Court that no permissions are being granted by the State Government for holding Dharnas and protests at the Shaheed Smarak. That would sufficiently deal with the first prayer in this public interest litigation. As regards the second prayer for earmarking another place for holding Dharna and protests, learned Standing Counsel states that the District Administration has submitted a report to the State Government, which is under active consideration.
(3.) This is evidently a matter where it would not be appropriate to the Court to issue any direction having regard to the constitutional mandate enshrined under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, but we expect that the State Government will take a decision, which must necessarily comprehend the facilitation of convenience of the members of the general public of the City, who are entitled to use the public roads for their normal and peaceful avocations. Holding of Dharna and protests is undoubtedly a feature, which is essential in a system wedded to democratic governance. However, the freedom of speech and of movement, which is recognized in the Constitution of India, has to be balanced with the freedom of others in such manner that the lives of common citizens are not disrupted by such Dharnas and protests.;