The relevant provisions of municipal corporation acts and the decision of the Council of Ministers of the State of Tamil Nadu influenced the court's decision to decline relief to the association seeking to prevent obstruction of public roads for conducting meetings.

ORDER

1. THIS IS AN APPEAL PREFERRED BY AN ASSOCIATION IN THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU AGAINST THE JUDGMENT OF THE DIVISION BENCH OF THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS. IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST PETITION, IT WAS ALLEGED THAT ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS THE PUBLIC ROADS ARE OBSTRUCTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONDUCTING MEETINGS AT K.K. ROAD, VILLUPURAM, TAMIL NADU AND THIS CAUSES INCONVENIENCE TO THE PUBLIC AND THE APPELLANT SOUGHT FOR A DIRECTION TO THE C AUTHORITIES FOR NOT GRANTING PERMISSION TO ANY PERSON OR PERSONS OR ORGANIZATIONS OR POLITICAL PARTIES, FOR HOLDING PUBLIC MEETINGS OR ERECTING ANY STAGE, AT K.K. ROAD, VILLUPURAM. THE DIVISION BENCH DECLINED TO GRANT RELIEF AND HENCE THIS APPEAL.

2. WHEN THE MATTER CAME UP FOR HEARING THIS COURT DIRECTED THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU TO EXPLAIN AS TO WHY ORDERS SHOULD NOT BE PASSED, NOT TO PERMIT D THE BLOCKING OF ANY MAIN STREET/ROAD. PURSUANT TO THE DIRECTION OF THIS COURT, THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, STATE OF TAMIL NADU FILED AN AFFIDAVIT. RELEVANT PORTION OF THE AFFIDAVIT READS AS FOLLOWS:

“I RESPECTFULLY SUBMIT THAT IN PURSUANCE OF THE INTERIM ORDERS DATED 29-7-2002 OF THIS HONBLE COURT IN THE ABOVE MATTER DIRECTING TO TAKE INSTRUCTIONS TO THE EFFECT THAT NO TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT STRUCTURE SHALL EVER BE ALLOWED ON A MAIN ROAD THEREBY BLOCKING FREE MOVEMENT OF TRAFFIC, THE SUBJECT WAS CONSIDERED BY THE COUNCIL OF MINISTERS OF THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU IN ITS MEETING HELD ON 19-9-2002, IN WHICH IT WAS DECIDED THAT NO TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT STRUCTURE WHICH AFFECTS FREE FLOW OF TRAFFIC BE ALLOWED ON MAIN ROADS. A COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE SAID MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF MINISTERS IS IN ANNEXURE I.

IT IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED THAT SECTION 220 OF THE CHENNAI CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ACT, 1919 (TAMIL NADU ACT 4 OF 1919) INTER ALIA PROVIDES THAT NO ONE SHALL BUILD ANY WALL OR ERECT ANY FENCE OR OTHER OBSTRUCTION OR PROJECTION OR MAKE ANY ENCROACHMENT IN OR OVER ANY STREET, THE CONTROL OF WHICH IS VESTED IN THE CORPORATION. FURTHER, SECTION 222 OF 9 THE SAID ACT PROVIDES THAT THE COMMISSIONER MAY BY NOTICE REQUIRE THE OCCUPIER TO REMOVE ENCROACHMENT OR OBSTRUCTION IN OR OVER ANY STREET THE CONTROL OF WHICH IS VESTED IN THE CORPORATION. SIMILAR PROVISIONS ARE ALSO AVAILABLE IN OTHER ACTS RELATING TO THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS OF MADURAI, COIMBATORE, TIRUCHIRAPALLI, SALEM AND TIRUNELVELI IN TAMIL NADU. IT IS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT SECTION 180 OF THE TAMIL NADU DISTRICT MUNICIPALITIES ACT, 1920 (TAMIL NADU ACT 5 OF 1920) PROVIDES THAT NO ONE SHALL BUILD ANY WALL OR ERECT ANY FENCE OR OTHER OBSTRUCTION, OR PROJECTION, OR MAKE ANY ENCROACHMENT IN OR OVER ANY STREET EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN THE SAID ACT. SECTION 180-A OF THE SAID ACT PROVIDES THAT ALL STREETS VESTED IN OR TO BE VESTED IN OR MAINTAINED BY A MUNICIPAL COUNCIL SHALL BE OPEN TO PERSONS OF WHATEVER CASTE OR CREED. SECTION 182(1) OF THE SAID ACT PROVIDES THAT THE EXECUTIVE AUTHORITY MAY BY NOTICE REQUIRE THE OWNER OR OCCUPIER OF ANY PREMISES TO REMOVE OR ALTER ANY PROJECTION, ENCROACHMENT OR OBSTRUCTION (OTHER THAN A DOOR, GATE, BAR OR GROUND-FLOOR WINDOW) SITUATED AGAINST OR IN FRONT OF SUCH PREMISES AND IN OR OVER ANY STREET. RELEVANT EXTRACTS OF THE SAID PROVISIONS OF THE SAID ACTS ARE IN ANNEXURE II."

3. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVESAID IN THE AFFIDAVIT, NO FURTHER ORDERS ARE C NECESSARY.

4. THE CIVIL APPEAL STANDS DISPOSED OF ACCORDINGLY.