Case Note & Summary
A public interest litigation and two writ petitions were filed before the Bombay High Court challenging the erection of hoardings by an advertising company on land owned by the Airports Authority of India near Juhu Beach, Mumbai. The petitioner in the PIL, a practicing advocate, sought removal of the hoardings on the ground that the advertising company, Guju Ads Private Limited, had erected 12 hoardings without obtaining necessary permissions from the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) and the Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority (MCZMA). The land, CTS Nos. 940 and 958, was partly leased to MCGM for public parking. The second writ petition was filed by Palm Grove Beach Hotels Pvt. Ltd., which runs a five-star hotel nearby, alleging that six hoardings blocked air, ventilation, and the sea view, and were erected in violation of local laws and CRZ norms. The hotel relied on a notice issued by MCGM under Section 354A of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 directing the advertising agency to stop work, and a communication from MCGM to AAI declaring the work unauthorized and requesting restraint. The third writ petition was filed by another advertising company, Selvel Publicity & Consultants Pvt. Ltd., aggrieved by the unauthorized erection of hoardings. The central legal issue was whether such hoardings required permission from MCGM as the planning authority and from MCZMA under coastal zone regulations. The petitions highlighted violations of the hoarding policy framed under Sections 328 and 328A of the MMC Act, 1888, and the absence of prior clearances from the traffic police and other authorities. The matters were reserved for judgment on 10 January 2018 and pronounced on 1 March 2018. The provided judgment text does not include the court’s analysis or final decision.
Issue of Consideration
Whether the hoardings erected on land owned by the Airports Authority of India near Juhu Beach require permission from the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai as a planning authority and from the Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority under the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 and CRZ norms.
Case Details
2018 LawText (BOM) (03) 77
PIL (L) No. 119 of 2017 along with WP (L) No. 3360 of 2017 and WP (L) No. 3433 of 2017
S.C. Dharmadhikari, Smt. Bharati H. Dangre
Mr. Mihir Desai (Senior Counsel) with Mr. Chetan Mali for Petitioner in PIL; Mr. Sagar Patil for MCGM; Mr. Karl Shroff for AAI; Ms. S.U. Deshmukh for MCZMA; Mr. Mukesh Vashi (Senior Counsel) with Ms. Aparna Devkar, Ms. Manisha Desai, Mr. Sanjay Kotak for Petitioner in WP 3360; Mr. Milind Sathe (Senior Counsel) with Mr. Vivek Shetty and Ms. Ashwini Vaidialingam for Guju Ads; Mr. Himanshu Takke (AGP) for State; Mr. Shyam Mehta (Senior Counsel) with Mr. Ashish Kamat, Ms. Nita Solanki, Mr. Kiran Jain for Petitioner in WP 3433; Mr. A.L. Patki (Addl. Govt. Pleader) for State
Farzana Khan, Palm Grove Beach Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Selvel Publicity & Consultants Pvt. Ltd.
Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, Airports Authority of India, Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority, Guju Ads Private Limited, State of Maharashtra, The Municipal Commissioner, Deputy Municipal Commissioner (Special), Assistant Municipal Commissioner K/West Ward, The Superintendent of Licences, The Assessor & Collector, The Bombay Electric Supply & Transport Undertaking, The Joint Commissioner of Police (Traffic), The Senior Inspector of Police Santacruz Police Station
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Public interest litigation and writ petitions seeking removal of unauthorized hoardings erected on land owned by the Airports Authority of India, alleging violation of statutory provisions and lack of permissions from municipal and coastal zone authorities.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought writ of mandamus directing MCGM to remove the hoardings; interim relief to restrain further erection; and declarations that permissions from MCGM and MCZMA are mandatory.
Filing Reason
Erection of hoardings by Guju Ads on AAI land without obtaining required permissions under the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, Hoarding Policy, and CRZ norms, thereby causing obstruction of view, ventilation, and potential safety hazards.
Previous Decisions
MCGM issued a notice under Section 354A of the MMC Act directing stoppage of erection within 24 hours, and later a communication declaring the work unauthorized; the matter was pending before the High Court.
Issues
Whether the hoardings require prior permission from the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai as the planning authority under the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888.
Whether the hoardings require clearance from the Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority under CRZ regulations.
Submissions/Arguments
The hoardings were erected without any permissions from MCGM, MCZMA, or traffic police, in violation of Sections 328 and 328A of the MMC Act and the Hoarding Policy.
The hoardings block the air, ventilation, and sea view of the hotel property, causing nuisance and encroachment on public land.
MCGM had declared the work unauthorized and issued a stop-work notice under Section 354A, but the respondents continued construction.
The land is located in a CRZ area, requiring prior approval from MCZMA, which was not obtained.
Judgment Excerpts
The controversy revolves around erection of hoardings by one M/s Guju Ads Private Limited, registered under the Companies Act on the land CTS No.940 and 958 owned by the Airports Authority of India, touching the public road. The issue for consideration is whether such hoardings warrant a permission from the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the “MCGM”) as a Planning Authority and of the Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority (hereinafter referred to as “MCZMA”).
the petitioner was informed that a notice under section 354A of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 (hereinafter referred to as the “MMC Act”, 1888) was already issued and the advertising agency was directed to stop erection of hoardings within 24 hours from service of notice.
By the said notice, the AAI was asked to restrain its contractor from carrying out any unauthorized development work. Attention of the AAI was also invited to the unauthorized work being carried out in CRZ area without permission of the Competent Authority.
Procedural History
PIL (L) No. 119 of 2017 was filed by Farzana Khan, an advocate, challenging the erection of hoardings. Simultaneously, Palm Grove Beach Hotels Pvt. Ltd. filed WP (L) No. 3360 of 2017, and Selvel Publicity & Consultants Pvt. Ltd. filed WP (L) No. 3433 of 2017, all concerning the same set of hoardings. The matters were clubbed together. MCGM had earlier issued a notice under Section 354A of the MMC Act and communicated to AAI that the work was unauthorized. The petitions were heard by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court, which reserved judgment on 10 January 2018 and pronounced it on 1 March 2018.
Acts & Sections
- Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888: 328, 328A, 354A
- Airports Authority of India Act, 1994:
- Companies Act, 1956:
