IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J
St. Stephen`s Malankara Catholic Church - Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala - Respondent
WP(C) NO. 22750 OF 2018
Decided On : 13-03-2025
(A) Kerala Municipality Act - Sections 268 and 278; Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 - Removal of unauthorized boards, banners, flags, and festoons - Court emphasizes the need to address visual pollution and maintain aesthetics in public spaces, ordering local authorities to act decisively against illegal installations. (Paras 1 - 40 )
(B) Public Interest - The Court recognizes the detrimental effects of visual pollution on tourism and public safety, asserting that unauthorized installations must be removed to preserve the state's natural beauty. (Paras 1 - 10 )
(C) Responsibilities of Authorities - The Court imposes personal liability on local self-government officials for non-compliance with removal orders, establishing a framework for accountability and ongoing monitoring. (Paras 34 - 40 )
Facts of the case:
A writ petition was filed due to obstruction caused by unauthorized billboards in public spaces, prompting the Court to address the widespread issue of visual pollution and the failure of authorities to enforce removal orders.
Findings of Court:
The Court confirmed the binding nature of prior orders and directed comprehensive measures for the removal of unauthorized installations, emphasizing the personal responsibility of local officials.
Issues: The main issues included the legality of unauthorized installations, the responsibility of local authorities, and the ongoing failure to enforce removal orders.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court ruled that visual pollution must be addressed for public safety and aesthetic integrity, mandating local authorities to take immediate action against illegal installations.
Result: Writ petitions ordered with binding directives for removal of unauthorized installations and accountability measures for local authorities.
JUDGMENT :
Rarely, if not ever, has ' Visual Pollution ' and “ Destination Aesthetics ”– so vital to tourism – seriously, if not at all, engaged the attention of the Authorities in Kerala. These concepts are widely used to describe the compounded effects of disorder, excess and clutter of various objects and graphics in the landscape; and the inevitable corollary of lack of visual appeal and aesthetics.
2. While many parts of the World have awoken to the pernicious effects of “Visual Pollution” - which, in its most simplistic connotation, means the impairment of one's ability to enjoy a vista or a view - and its impact on safety, health and environment, leading to effective legislations against it, our civil officials, Authorities and politicians remain totally occluded to it often contributing to it unmindfully.
3. This is particularly a shame in our small State, which is an eclectic God bestowed cornucopia of enchanting waterfalls, beautiful lagoons, meandering rivers, breath taking hill stations and other amazing natural scenarios - making it a traveller's dream and a tourist's fantasy.
4. Kerala is truly 'Gods Own Country' - buffeted by the warm winds of the Arabian Sea to the West and sheltered by the Western Ghats to the East; from resplendent tea plantations to rich jungles; from the stunning beaches to the maze of backwater canals cutting through rice fields - the viridity unfolds in varying shades of lush green, as the colour spectrum expands to accommodate its soul.
5. Nature having bestowed our State with such visual magnificence, it is our existential compulsion to protect and preserve it, maintaining the tenuous balance between ever expanding human activity and sustainable development.
6. But, alas, this is one sphere in which policy makers, civil enforcement officials and politicians have failed; and unfortunately political parties - to whom the citizens of this State would normally turn for guidance and leadership - have been the contributors to “visual pollution” and aesthetic violation, compounded by the obvious health and safety risks attached to it, by carelessly, thoughtlessly and without care of its consequences, placing and installing large boards, banners, flags, festoons and such other in every nook and corner of public spaces and streets. Private entities and individuals have also followed it, advertising themselves or their wares through such boards and banners, knowing fully well that they are illegal, but presumably emboldened on account of such installations by the political class and even parties in power. 7. A survey on tourist magazines would luculently show the endless appeals to enjoy beautiful destinations, displaying photographs of blue seas, green islands, sailing boats and splendorous sunsets. When it comes to urban tourism, such images are sold with expressions of beauty, cityscapes inviting to be walked, inviting lighting, cozy restaurants, etc. The quest of tourists is essentially for beauty. Aesthetics matter . In marketing tourism, the first thing travellers relate to is the image of the place and destination they visit. Neatness is one of the most essential parameters and tourists have an anticipated idea of what they want to see – and it is certainly not dirt or lack of order, but expect the aesthetics they had foreseen. Indubitably, tourist attractions or facilities, cityscapes and landscapes, are appreciated only if properly presented and aesthetically maintained. Experience has shown that pedestrian tourists are more mysterious looking for neat sidewalks, colourful showcases, comfortable benches, fragrant farbars, restored old buildings with glorious facades.
8. How does our landscapes compare? Alas, somehow and for inscrutable reasons, the current condition of pedestrian areas in most parts of our state are overlooked and neglected. Be that in the Cities, Towns or Villages, public spaces are not ideal case studies, as they are often obstructed by electric wires, gaping manholes
The Court mandates local authorities to remove unauthorized installations to combat visual pollution and emphasizes personal accountability for non-compliance.
The court affirmed that unauthorized flag masts in public spaces must be removed and that no new installations are permitted without proper legal authorization.
Travancore-Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950 makes provision for administration, supervision and control of incorporated and unincorporated Devaswoms and of other Hindu Religious Endowmen....
The court established that manufacturers must register under the Plastic Waste Management Rules, 2016, to ensure compliance and prevent environmental hazards.
No legal provision allows the permanent erection of political party flagpoles in public places; unauthorized flagpoles must be removed.
Any failure on part of the designated authorities, contractor, consultant or concessionaire in maintaining the safety standards of public roads will attract the penal consequences provided under Sect....
The subsequent amendments to the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, and the government orders/circulars regulating the use of flags, insignia, and name boards in motor vehicles rendered the issuance....
The court reinforced the necessity of compliance with prior rulings regarding the installation of advertisements in public spaces.
The court mandated the State to urgently implement road safety measures under the Kerala Road Safety Authority Act, 2007, to curb the rising number of traffic accidents, asserting that public safety ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.