RAGAVENDRA AD LAB Vs. SENIOR DIVISIONAL COMMERCIAL MANAGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners in these batch of writ petitions had granted permission by the Southern Railway authorities to erect hoardings for display of advertisement in the Railway premises, on payment of licence fee. The Corporation of Chennai has sought to regulate those hoardings by insisting that the petitioners shall obtain licence, otherwise those hoardings could be removed by them. In these circumstances, the petitioners have filed these writ petitions seeking to forbear the respondent Corporation of Chennai from interfering with the hoardings put up by them in the Railway premises. The issue that arises for consideration in all these writ petitions is as to whether the Corporation of Chennai can regulate the hoardings that are put up in the Railway premises, by the private parties, who are the petitioners herein.

(2.) Mr. T.R. Rajagopalan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for B.S.G. Firm, learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P. No. 7322 of 2012 has submitted that since the hoardings are erected in the Railway premises, the petitioners cannot be asked to take licence in view of Section 185 of the Railways Act, 1989. He also relied on Article 285 of the Constitution of India in this regard. He has relied on the following judgments in support of his submission:

(3.) Mr. T.R. Rajagopalan, learned Senior Counsel has vehemently contended that neither Corporation of Chennai nor IT Expressway Limited, a company owned by the Government of Tamil Nadu, has got power to regulate the hoardings put up by the petitioners in the Railway premises.