CIDCO Notice Spawns Ad Agencies To Challenge

After the City and Industrial Development Corporation (CIDCO) issued notices on May 22 to remove illegal hoardings in the Navi Mumbai Airport Influence Notified Area (NAINA), two advertising agencies have filed petitions in the Bombay high court challenging the notice. The agencies argue that these notices, which require action within 24 hours, are arbitrary and unlawful.

CIDCO’s action comes after a massive billboard in Ghatkopar collapsed on a busy petrol pump on May 13, killing 17 and injuring 75 others. After the incident, CIDCO issued multiple notices to advertisers, including the petitioners, citing the need to prevent similar accidents.

The petitioners — Devangi Outdoor Advertising and Harmesh Dilip Tanna, proprietor of Gargee Graphics — erect hoardings overlooking highways and expressways, securing these locations legally and obtaining necessary permissions from the authorities. Despite this, they received notices on May 22 to remove their hoardings within 24 hours or face prosecution under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966. The notices also threatened that if the hoardings were not removed, the authorities would dismantle them and recover the costs from the petitioners.

The petitioners argue that the notices are illegal for several reasons. They lack specific measurements of the alleged unauthorised structures and do not clarify whether the structures are temporary or permanent. Additionally, the notices do not include sketches or detailed descriptions of the alleged unauthorised structures. The petitioners claim that the notices were issued without a show-cause notice, violating principles of natural justice.

While acknowledging the severity of the Ghatkopar incident, the petitioners assert that it does not justify indiscriminate action against all advertisers without verifying the structural stability of their hoardings. They contend that CIDCO’s actions are not only arbitrary but also ex-facie illegal. A vacation bench comprising Justice N.R. Borkar and Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan will hear the petitions on Monday.While acknowledging the severity of the Ghatkopar incident, the petitioners assert that it does not justify indiscriminate action against all advertisers without verifying the structural stability of their hoardings. They contend that CIDCO’s actions are not only arbitrary but also ex-facie illegal. A vacation bench comprising Justice N.R. Borkar and Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan will hear the petitions on Monday.While acknowledging the severity of the Ghatkopar incident, the petitioners assert that it does not justify indiscriminate action against all advertisers without verifying the structural stability of their hoardings. They contend that CIDCO’s actions are not only arbitrary but also ex-facie illegal. A vacation bench comprising Justice N.R. Borkar and Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan will hear the petitions on Monday.

While acknowledging the severity of the Ghatkopar incident, the petitioners assert that it does not justify indiscriminate action against all advertisers without verifying the structural stability of their hoardings. They contend that CIDCO’s actions are not only arbitrary but also ex-facie illegal. A vacation bench comprising Justice N.R. Borkar and Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan will hear the petitions on Monday.