Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 45857

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, CJ, G.Arul Murugan, J
Pazhani Raja S – Appellant
Versus
District Collector – Respondent
WP No.17103 of 2026

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: K.S.Ilangovan
For the Respondents: V.Vasanthakumar

The court held that unauthorized advertisement hoardings, where valid permissions have expired and not been renewed, must be removed by state authorities to ensure road safety and compliance with municipal regulations.

Headnote:The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a mandamus against the state authorities to remove advertisement hoardings erected by private entities, alleging that they were placed illegally and without valid permission. The petitioner contended that the structures posed a traffic hazard at a major junction. The court examined the records presented by the authorities. The core issue was whether the hoardings maintained by the private entities possessed the required legal authorization. The court found that the previously granted permission for these hoardings had expired in March 2024 and no renewal had been sought or granted by the competent authorities. Thus, the continued existence of the hoardings was held to be unauthorized, necessitating immediate remedial action to maintain public order and road safety. The writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities to act swiftly to remove the illegal hoardings.

Table of Content
1. state authorities are mandated to remove structures erected without valid statutory permission. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)

This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks direction upon respondents 1 to 6 to remove the advertisement hoardings illegally put up by respondents 7 and 8.

2. On instructions, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 6 submitted that on thorough scrutiny of the records, it is ascertained that permission earlier granted for a period of five years expired in the month of March, 2024, and thereafter, respondents 7 and 8 did not apply for renewal, and permission has not been renewed. The present position is that there is no valid permission for erection of the said hoardings.

3. In view of the aforesaid, the hoardings are liable to be removed through the joint action of the respondent authorities, as early as possible. The respondent authorities are directed to take action swiftly and remove the illegal hoardings at the earliest.

4. The petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid direction.

There will be no order as to costs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 45857

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASSushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, CJ, G.Arul Murugan, JPazhani Raja S – AppellantVersusDistrict Collector – RespondentWP No.17103 of 2026

The court held that unauthorized advertisement hoardings, where valid permissions have expired and not been renewed, must be removed by state authorities to ensure road safety and compliance with municipal regulations.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, CJ, G.Arul Murugan, J
Pazhani Raja S – Appellant
Versus
District Collector – Respondent
WP No.17103 of 2026