Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Notice Before Admission vs State Of Gujarat And Others on 12 August, 2021
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
MAIN CASE No. W.P.No.17110 of 2021
PROCEEDING SHEET
Sl. OFFICE
DATE ORDER
No NOTE.
1. 12.08.2021 DR,J
W.P.No.17110 of 2021
Notice before admission.
Government Pleader for Municipal
Administration takes notice on behalf of the 1st
respondent.
Government Pleader for Revenue takes
notice on behalf of the 2nd respondent.
Government Pleader for Home takes notice
on behalf of the 3rd respondent.
Government Pleader for Road and
Buildings takes notice on behalf of the 4th
respondent.
Sri M.Manohar Reddy, Standing Counsel
takes notice on behalf of the 5th respondent.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has
submitted that he made a representation to the
District Collector on 09.08.2021 and also to the
Municipal Commissioner, on the same day, to
take steps for preventing the unauthorized
erection of statue in the place provided for
installation at Kurnool road, near Nava Bharat
Building, Ongole, Prakasam District.
Further he relied on the judgment passed
by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Union of India Vs.
State of Gujarat and Others, S.L.P.(C) No.8519
of 2006 (W.P.(C)No.314 of 2010) wherein Hon'ble
Apex Court held that -
"1. We have heard Mr.Basavaprabhu S.Patil, learned
senior counsel for the applicant and
Mr.M.T.George, learned counsel for the state of
Kerala.
2. Mr.M.T.George, learned counsel for the State of
Kerala placed before us a copy of the order dated
September 7, 2011 passed by the Government of
Kerala granting permission for installation of
statue of late Shri N.Sundaran Nadar, Ex-Deputy
Speaker of Kerala Legislative Assembly near to
Neyyattinkara -Poovar Road in the curve turning
to the KSRTC Bus Stand Neyyattinkara in the
Kanyakumari National Highway near bus stand.
3. We have our doubt whether such permission
could have been granted by the State
Government for installation of statue on the
national highway.
4. Until further orders, we direct that the status-quo,
as obtaining today, shall be maintained in all
respects by all concerned with regard to the
Triangle Island where statue of late Shri
N.Sudnaran Nadar has been permitted to be
sanctioned. We further direct that henceforth,
State Government shall not grant any permission
for installation of any statue or construction of
any structure in public roads, pavements,
sideways and other public utility places.
Obviously, this order shall not apply to
installation of high mast lights, street lights or
construction relating to electrification, traffic, toll
or for development and beautification of the
streets, highways, roads etc. and relating to
public utility and facilities.
5. The above order shall also apply to all other
states and union territories. The concerned Chief
Secretary/Administrator shall ensure compliance
of the above order."
Following the above said direction, the
Government has issued G.O.Ms.No.18 Transport,
Roads and Buildings (Roads-1) Department,
dated 18.02.2013 , wherein paras 3 and 4 reads
as follows:
"3. In pursuance of the orders of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India, Government hereby
decide not to grant permission for installation of
any statute or construction of any structure in
public road, pavements, sideways and other
public utility places.
4. All the State Level and District Level
Officers mentioned in the address entry are
requested to ensure strict compliance of the
above orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of
India."
In view of the above, learned counsel for
the petitioner contended that despite the
petitioner made representation on 09.08.2021,
without considering the same, the authorities
have expedited the construction on the road for
erecting the statue on 13.08.2021.
In view of the submissions made by learned
counsel for the petitioner and on perusal of the
orders of the Hon'ble Apex Court as well as the
G.O.Ms.No.18, dated 18.02.2013, status-quo as
on today, shall be maintained.
Post after two (02) weeks, for filing counter.
Registry is directed to print the name of
Sri M.Manohar Reddy, standing counsel for the
5th respondent.
_______
+ DR,
J
Pnr
