Mumbai, April 11 The Bombay High Court is likely to pass an order on April 21 regarding the issue pertaining to illegal mushrooming of hoardings, especially mobile advertisement vans. The court on Friday directed that mobile hoarding vans will stay off the roads till then.
City-based gynaecologist Anahita Pundole had filed a public interest litigation against the mushrooming of illegal hoardings. During the hearing of the petition, the issue of allowing mobile hoarding vans to be parked around the city was taken up.
A division bench headed by Chief Justice Swatanter Kumar had come down heavily on the city municipal corporation for allowing these vans on the roads, and said that henceforth no such vans would be permitted. But a few mobile advertising companies had filed applications urging the court to reverse its order. The Mumbai Hoarding Owners' Association (MHOA) too has intervened in the case.
The division bench of Chief Justice Swatanter Kumar and Justice V M Kanade reserved the order after hearing the arguments today.
The municipal corporation’s as well as the van owners’ stand is that mobile advertising vans are permitted under the corporation rules, and they are permitted to stand for only two hours at one site, that too ensuring that traffic is not obstructed.
However, Pundole's lawyer Iqbal Chhagla last week alleged that there are more hoarding vans on roads than permitted. The court had earlier asked Additional Commissioner of Police (traffic) to file a reply in this regard. However, no reply was filed.
The court has now cautioned the authorities to file an affidavit, otherwise the ACP will have to remain present in the court on April 15. The court has directed the ACP (traffic) to state in affidavit as to how many hoarding vans have been allowed, the actual number of such vans on city roads and if any sites have been fixed for them to park.
The MHOA too has sought a stay on the guidelines issued by the municipal corporation regulating hoardings. The association claims that the Municipal Commissioner does not have powers to issue such guidelines which may not be in affirmative with the statutory provisions.
Express news servicePosted online: Saturday , April 12, 2008 at 11:28:13Updated: Saturday , April 12, 2008 at 11:28:13
About Me
- Kamal Kumar Pandey (Adv. Supreme Court of India)
- Lawyer Practising at Supreme Court of India. Court Experience: Criminal, Civil & PIL (related to Property, Tax, Custom & Duties, MVAC, insurance, I.P.R., Copyrights & Trademarks, Partnerships, Labour Disputes, etc.) Socio-Legal: Child Rights, Mid Day Meal Programme, Sarva Shiksha Abhiyaan, Women Rights, Against Female Foeticide, P.R.Is, Bonded Labour, Child labour, Child marriage, Domestic violence, Legal Literacy, HIV/AIDS, etc. Worked for Legal Aid/Advise/Awareness/Training/Empowerment/Interventions/Training & Sensitisation.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comment