Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
C.V. BHASKAR REDDY
Ad Space – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners challenge removal of advertisement hoardings. (Para 2 , 4) |
| 2. respondent's authority under the cantonments act. (Para 5 , 8 , 10) |
| 3. procedural compliance by respondents. (Para 6 , 7 , 9) |
| 4. public safety overrides individual interests. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 5. writ petitions dismissed for lack of merit. (Para 15 , 16) |
ORDER :
1. The issue involved in these writ petitions is intrinsically interconnected and therefore, they are taken up and heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.
2. This batch of cases has been filed by the petitioners seeking to declare the action of respondent No.2 in issuing impugned notices directing the petitioners to remove the advertisement hoardings on their respective premises situated at Secunderabad, as bad in law, illegal, discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently prayed this Court to direct the respondent No.2 to restrain from removing the advertisement hoardings from the respective premises and for other appropriate reliefs.
3. Writ Petition No.13829 of 2024 is taken up as a leading case to decide the lis in this batch of cases.
4. It is the case of the petit
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
