It’s logically unsound to allow govt hoardings alone: Jurists
‘Govt, Parties Don’t Stand On Different Footing’
A.Subramani@timesgroup.com
Chennai:04.10.2019
Public safety-wise, are hoardings erected by government any different from those put up by political parties? While jurists insist both are as bad and it would be ‘logically unsound’ to try and distinguish between political party and government, the Madras high court has a different take.
On Thursday, the court did not stop Tamil Nadu government’s proposal to install hoardings and, instead, said curbs on hoardings were for political parties alone.
So here it is: With court ‘nod’, even as public outrage over the death of techie R Subashree simmers, the Tamil Nadu government will erect hoardings and digital banners at specified locations for more than 40km, between Chennai airport and Mamallapuram, from October 9 to 13 to mark Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping.
“The state government filing an application for putting up hoardings is an ingenious method to make an illegality into a legality. Government and political parties do not stand on a different footing, and what we here have is a political government,” said Justice K Chandru, former judge, Madras high court.
When it comes to regulation, government and a private person are equal, he said, adding, “in a no-parking zone, can they park government vehicles alone?”
“Isn’t law equal to all? If there could be a blanket ban on hoardings by political parties, why should a government be allowed to erect political party, he asked. This round of litigation has set a bad precedent, said senior advocate and Rajya Sabha member P Wilson, who also argued the case before the division bench of the Madras high court on Thursday.
When a foreign dignitary is on visit, the protocol is a matter of convention and tradition, said Justice Chandru, adding, “only if they want to go on public procession would barricades be put up and public line up. There is nothing like erecting hoardings.”
Anyway government or anyone cannot put up hoardings on Kathipara-Pallavaram as there is a Supreme Court order upholding a ban, and digging up or erecting something in Mamallapuram itself is prohibited as it is a heritage site, he said.
In China there is no cutout or hoarding culture, Vijayan said, adding, “Xi Jinping will neither be impressed by hoardings, nor be disappointed in case he does not find them along the route.” them,” asked social activist Traffic Ramaswamy. It is Ramaswamy’s pending contempt petition against bureaucrats that gave life to the illegal hoardings issue, when it came up for hearing a day after Subashree’s death.
“I will go to the Supreme Court against the order, if it dilutes the hoardings law in any manner,” he said.
Senior advocate K M Vijayan said when probability of an accident is the basis for ban, it is immaterial who puts up the banner.
When it comes to public safety, public health and sovereignty of the State, courts could be assertive and impose blanket ban. Also, noting that as per the Constitution, individuals cannot form the government and that only political parties can do that, he said, “There is no dichotomy between party and government.” If the ban is only for political parties, can an individual or an actor tomorrow seek permission to erect hoardings saying he is not part of any
‘Govt, Parties Don’t Stand On Different Footing’
A.Subramani@timesgroup.com
Chennai:04.10.2019
Public safety-wise, are hoardings erected by government any different from those put up by political parties? While jurists insist both are as bad and it would be ‘logically unsound’ to try and distinguish between political party and government, the Madras high court has a different take.
On Thursday, the court did not stop Tamil Nadu government’s proposal to install hoardings and, instead, said curbs on hoardings were for political parties alone.
So here it is: With court ‘nod’, even as public outrage over the death of techie R Subashree simmers, the Tamil Nadu government will erect hoardings and digital banners at specified locations for more than 40km, between Chennai airport and Mamallapuram, from October 9 to 13 to mark Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping.
“The state government filing an application for putting up hoardings is an ingenious method to make an illegality into a legality. Government and political parties do not stand on a different footing, and what we here have is a political government,” said Justice K Chandru, former judge, Madras high court.
When it comes to regulation, government and a private person are equal, he said, adding, “in a no-parking zone, can they park government vehicles alone?”
“Isn’t law equal to all? If there could be a blanket ban on hoardings by political parties, why should a government be allowed to erect political party, he asked. This round of litigation has set a bad precedent, said senior advocate and Rajya Sabha member P Wilson, who also argued the case before the division bench of the Madras high court on Thursday.
When a foreign dignitary is on visit, the protocol is a matter of convention and tradition, said Justice Chandru, adding, “only if they want to go on public procession would barricades be put up and public line up. There is nothing like erecting hoardings.”
Anyway government or anyone cannot put up hoardings on Kathipara-Pallavaram as there is a Supreme Court order upholding a ban, and digging up or erecting something in Mamallapuram itself is prohibited as it is a heritage site, he said.
In China there is no cutout or hoarding culture, Vijayan said, adding, “Xi Jinping will neither be impressed by hoardings, nor be disappointed in case he does not find them along the route.” them,” asked social activist Traffic Ramaswamy. It is Ramaswamy’s pending contempt petition against bureaucrats that gave life to the illegal hoardings issue, when it came up for hearing a day after Subashree’s death.
“I will go to the Supreme Court against the order, if it dilutes the hoardings law in any manner,” he said.
Senior advocate K M Vijayan said when probability of an accident is the basis for ban, it is immaterial who puts up the banner.
When it comes to public safety, public health and sovereignty of the State, courts could be assertive and impose blanket ban. Also, noting that as per the Constitution, individuals cannot form the government and that only political parties can do that, he said, “There is no dichotomy between party and government.” If the ban is only for political parties, can an individual or an actor tomorrow seek permission to erect hoardings saying he is not part of any
No comments:
Post a Comment