PANAJI
The Bombay High Court at Goa has asked the Goa government and several agencies including the Corporation of the City of Panaji to list out, within three weeks the action they have taken and propose to take against illegal, oversized and dangerous hoardings that are not only distracting drivers but also ruining the natural beauty of Goa.
Hearing a suo motu writ petition that was initiated way back in 2007 (15 years ago), the High Court directed the the State government municipal corporation, municipalities, panchayats, local authorities and the National Highway Authority to place on record the current status of all the existing hoardings in their respective jurisdiction with appropriate details as to which of these hoardings are authorised and complying with the regulations with specific remarks that although permitted they are not in any manner a public nuisance.
“This information should be in a tabulated form setting out all details with regard to permissions, actions taken. A separate statement be annexed to such an affidavit in regard to illegal hoardings, the details of the action taken/proposed to be taken in regard to such hoardings with specific reference to the time limit within which such hoardings would be removed,” the High Court stated.
“The affidavit should also specify the names of the agencies/land owners who are habitual in putting up illegal hoardings [and] above shall inform the Court as to whether any concrete departmental mechanism is devised to keep information or maintain a database, in regard to the persons who are responsible for putting up hoardings/illegal hoardings including the names of advertising agencies, companies/organisations whose advertisements are the subject matter of hoardings who also become accountable for any illegality and nuisance caused by such hoardings/advertisements
being the ultimate beneficiaries having taken the commercial benefit of such illegal hoardings,” the High Court bench of Justices M S Sonak and G S Kulkarni, said.
The High Court will next hear the matter on November 10, while the responding government agencies have been asked to file their responses in three weeks.
Earlier, the High Court noted how authorities across all levels had abdicated their responsibility for monitoring the hoardings.
“Unless such a concrete mechanism is available, the concerns raised in the present proceedings would never come to an end and in fact the situation is likely to get worse,” the High Court noted.
“It is impossible to find out a street in Panaji which is not dominated by hoardings making the life of the residents miserable. We may observe that in one of the orders passed in the present proceedings this Court has raised serious concern in regard to hoardings which are by the side of the river and which are likely to attract the attention of the drivers of the vehicles plying on the three important bridges connecting Panaji to Porvorim. This is certainly a matter of serious concern,” the Amicus Curiae, Adv Lotlikar told the High Court.
“Action to be taken by the authorities on illegal hoardings which ought to be a continuous exercise. There cannot be any excuse on the part of any of the authorities for not taking an action to remove illegal hoardings and in attending to complaints received on any objectionable hoardings irrespective of the fact that the hoardings purportedly have a permission, when the complaint is of a public nuisance. Accountability to be fixed to implement Rules and Regulations and the orders passed by this Court in regard to the removal of illegal hoardings,” the High Court observed.
“A permanent mechanism to be put in place whereby routinely all the public streets, roads, and highways are monitored by officers or their representatives in their respective jurisdiction and for any inaction in that regard accountability is fixed. As a consequence of such a mechanism, availability of up-to-date information in relation to all categories of hoardings, their locations, information on action taken on illegal hoardings with the dates of such actions and all details thereof, on the date of such information is sought for; the details of the owners of the structure and the agencies undertaking advertisements. Information in regard to the agencies applying for permission for advertisement, a database of which is to be maintained to be informed to the Court as and when called for,” the High Court also said.
