2024:MHC:1804 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 04.04.2024 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P. No.9224 of 2024 and W.M.P.No. 10265 of 2024 T.M.Chinnaiyan ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The District Collector, Cuddalore District, Cuddalore.

2. The Superintendent of Police, Cuddalore District, Cuddalore.

3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Chidambaram.

4. The Inspector of Police, Kumaratchi Police Station, Cuddalore District.

5. The Tahsildhar Kattumannar Kovil Taluk, Cuddalore District. ... Respondents Prayer:Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, for issuance of writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for entire records in respect of the order passed by Revenue Divisional Officer, Chidambaram in Na.Ka.No. A3/12/2022 dated 19.10.2022 and quash the same and consequently direct the fourth respondent to give permission for unveiling the statue of Dr.B.R.Ambedkar in Thirunaraiyur Village bus stand Cuddalore District.

For Petitioner : Mr.D. Rajagopal For R1, R3 and R5 : Mr.U.Baranidharan Additional Government Pleader For R2 and R4 : Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar Government Advocate

O R D E R

The order of rejection rejecting the claim of the petitioner to erect Leader Statue at Survey No.59/1A, Thirunaraiyur Village, Kattumannar Koil Taluk, Cuddalore District in proceeding dated 19.10.2022, passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Chidambaram is under challenge in the present writ petition.

2. Mr.D. Rajagopal, the learned Counsel for the petitioner would contend that the Statue of Dr.Ambedkar is to be erected in the Bus stand and the application submitted is rejected without any valid reason.

3. Further, the learned Counsel for the petitioner relied on the reply given under Right to Information Act (RTI) to establish that the subject property is not a water body as alleged by the respondents. Further, it is contended that the Statue has already been erected and the petitioner seeks permission to conduct functions.

4. The order impugned states that an application was submitted for erection of Statue in the public place. However, the learned Counsel for the petitioner states that it has already been erected and they are seeking permission to conduct function. This fact is to be verified by the District Collector. If any miscreants have installed the Statue without the permission of the Competent Authorities in the year 2022, then, such erections are to be removed as it is illegal and violative of the Orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in an unequivocal terms held that no Statues or permanent structures can be constructed in the public roads and Government lands. Therefore, any illegal erection or construction of structures in public roads and public places are to be removed by following the procedures. As far as the claim of the petitioner is concerned, the impugned order states that the permission to erect Statue is rejected. 5. Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar, learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the 2^nd and 4^th respondents would submit that the issues have already been decided by this Court in W.P.No.23140 of 2014 dated 07.10.2021. As per the said Judgment, erection of Statues in public places are impermissible and the Hon'ble Supreme Court also passed an order. Para 34 of the said Judgment reads as under:

“34. In view of the facts and circumstances, this Court is inclined to issue the following directions:

(1) The first respondent is directed to identify the statues and structures in all public places, Highways, Public Roads, Government lands, Meikal Poramboke lands, etc., within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and thereafter, evict/remove all encroachments/unauthorised illegal structures, statues in public places, Highways/Public roads/Government lands/Meikal Poramboke lands etc., by following the procedures as contemplated under the relevant Acts and Rules in force.

(2) The first respondent is directed not to grant