VINOD KUMAR AGRAWAL Vs. STATE OF M.P.
LAWS(MPH)-1998-10-47
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Decided on October 05,1998

VINOD KUMAR AGRAWAL Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF M.P. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.)WITH the consent of the parties the petition is finally heard. The petitioners have approached this Court by filing this petition as 'public interest litigation'. It is submitted by the petitioners that under the Municipal Corporation Act and the By -laws framed thereunder the Municipal Corporation, Gwalior is empowered to permit the advertisements through kiosks within its territorial limits. For such advertisements the sanction of the Municipal Corporation is the pre -requisite.
(2.)THIS petition pertains to the area of the road dividers in between phoolbag Gurudwara and Padaw Chouraha. It is submitted by the petitioners that learned Sub -Divisional Magistrate, Gwalior, on taking into account the situation of the dividers and the one -way traffic on its side roads, had ordered the respective owners to remove their hoardings from the road dividers or to show -cause why those hoardings be not removed. After such order of the Sub -Divisional Magistrate various firms had applied to the respondent Corporation for permitting them to fix the kiosks on the dividers of the said area with 100% increase in the advertisement fee, fixed under the by -laws of the Corporation.
However, it is contended that the respondent No. 3 and 4 without taking permission from the Municipal Corporation Gwalior had fixed about 200 kiosks on the dividers. In such situation the petitioners had issued a notice for demand of justice praying to the respondents No. 1 and 2 for removal of such kiosks. But, as no heed was paid by the respondents, this petition was filed, in public interest as the inaction of respondents No. 1 and 2 was resulting in serious damage to public property and the loss of public revenue.

(3.)IT is not the case of the respondents No. 1 and 2 that the kiosks of respondents No. 3 and 4 have been fixed after due permission. The respondents No. 3 and 4 have also not stated that for fixing the kiosks on the dividers of the said area they have been granted any permission for the present but only stated that they had prayed for the renewal of the permission and had deposited the fees, The Commissioner of Municipal Corporation had made the position clear in this regard that merely by depositing any amount towards fees, the licence to fix the kiosks would not be taken to be renewed. As such, when the respondents No. 3 and 4 have no permission nor respondent Corporation has stated to have granted permission or renewal, the kiosks fixed in the said area presently without permission of the Corporation cannot be allowed to be continued and the inaction of the respondents No. 1 and 2 in this regard cannot be appreciated.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.