Karnataka HC aghast at lack of fines for illegal hoardings in public places

Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court on Thursday expressed dismay at the absence of deterrent penal provisions in the proposed Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (Advertisement) Bye-Laws, 2024 insofar against unauthorised hoardings/flexes at public places. A division bench comprising Chief Justice NV Anjaria and Justice KV Aravind also cautioned the authorities not to take the issue lightly.

The court was hearing a batch of PILs seeking directions for monitoring and regulation of advertisement hoardings and flexes in Bengaluru city. In the previous hearings, it was brought to the notice of the court that 2024 bye-laws are at the stage of consideration of the objections, including that of the petitioners.

At the hearing, GR Mohan, advocate for one of the petitioners, and other advocates took the court through the relevant provisions of the proposed bye-laws. The advocates submitted that the byelaws are conspicuously silent in respect of provisions against illegal erection of flexes/advertisement on public roads, footpaths and public places.

The bench noted that byelaws 15 (1) sub clause 3 deals with imposition of penalty twice the rate fixed in auction tender on the owner of the private property where unauthorized flex/advertisement is erected. “However, to the dismay of the court, the bylaws do not provide any such provision in respect of flexes/advertisements which may have been put up illegally and unauthorisedly in public places such as footpaths and public roads,” the bench said.

The court said the authorities should not take the issue lightly. “The problem of flexes in the city of Bengaluru is the bone of contention and bone of suffering by all. The original petition is of the year 2017 and we will revive it as a suo motu proceeding if you (BBMP) are taking the issue and proceedings lightly, (assuming) that we are closing the proceedings. We are addressing the issues of access to public roads. Come up with a permanent mechanism to stop it,” the bench orally said.

The court further pointed out that insofar as public places, such as road, footpath, property owned by the government, BBMP or Public Sector Units, PSU, the bylaw only states that such structures shall be removed immediately without any written notice. “The above provision is the only provision which indeed is not penal in nature. It is a provision for consequential provision. Consequential provision and penal provision are distinct provisions. There has to be a deterrent factor for those who indulge in the rampant erection of unauthorized flexes to encroach upon the public places and endanger the pedestrian and vehicular traffic,” the court said, while adjourning the matter to January 16, 2025.