JUDGMENT :- Issue notice.

2. The respondents are in caveat. Shri Ashok H. Desai, learned Senior Counsel represents the first and the second respondents the State of Tamil Nadu and the Sports Development Authority respectively. Shri V. R. Reddy, learned Senior Counsel represents the third respondent, the Tamil Nadu Film Producers Association.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

4. Leave granted. The matter is being disposed of finally in the following manner.

5. The minimal facts are these :

There is a Stadium known as Nehru Stadium in the city of Chennai owned by the Government of Tamil Nadu but in the care of the Sports Development Authority of Tamil Nadu. Its permissible user is fairly restricted. As far back on November 9, 1982 vide G.O. Ms. No. 2481 total ban has been imposed for conducting in the said Stadium activities other than sports and games and this ban is not only applicable to the said Stadium but to other Stadia in the State as well. The imperative need of keeping the Stadium isolated from illegitimate use had further been re-enforced by D.O. Lr. No. 7646/72/91, dated February 13, 1997 whereby it has been emphasised that the instructions that Sports Stadia should not be lent for any other purpose like holding Public Meetings, Cultural Programmes, Exhibitions etc. should be scrupulously followed. Now when the present Chief Minister, M. Karunanidhi is in his 71st year and the third respondent is keen to have his Platinum Jubilee celebrations, it has approached the State Government with the request that the Stadium be lent over to it on payment of certain charges for honouring the Chief Minister in the presence of a large gathering of invitees. The date proposed for the purpose is 27th September, 1998. Since the place would require a face-lift by means of decoration and otherwise, its possession is sought on 25th September, 1998. This prayer has been accepted by the concerned 2331 Secretary to the Government vide order dated 28th August, 1998 by observing as follows :

"The Government considered the said request. There is a general policy-decision to the extent that the Stadium cannot be allowed to be used other than Sports events. However, in order to raise flood relief funds at an earlier occasion it was permitted as a special permission. On the same lines to Honour the Honble Chief Minister in view of his Platinum Jubilee Celebrations as requested by the said Association, the Stadium may be handed over to them from 25-9-1998 onwards for the purposes of erection of stage, erection of arches, decorative entries apart from beautifying the stage, this special permission is granted so as to do the above and conduct the function on 27-9-1998."

6. This aroused Selvi Jayalalitha, the appellant public interest litigant herein, to question the step of the Government in ignoring the ban and permitting illegal use of the Stadium in the manner proposed and its view in letting it happen even when there was likely to be a lot of damage and despoilation to the place and in particular to the turf - natural as also synthetic, while erecting stage, arches etc. when beautifying the place. The writ petition filed by her before the Madras High Court was admitted by a Division Bench but on the prayer for interim relief, permission was granted to such user which virtually meant that the State could have its way on assurances given for the safety and ultimate upkeep of the place. That interim order is now the subject-matter of challenge in this appeal.

7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at great length. Shri Ashok Desai has placed before us a map of the Stadium which we take as part of the record. A bare look of that plan discloses that at the centre of the Stadium is a lawn or ground which has a natural turf. The same is surrounded by a synthetic turfed track shown in orange colour in oval shape. It is given out by the State that both the turfs would be permitted to be used to the minimum and that basically the audience woul