Hoardings in Mysore violate Supreme Court order

Mysore is now cluttered with roadside hoardings. Some of them have skimpily clad models and flashing lights. They are quite distracting to the drivers of vehicles and may even be causing accidents. The Supreme Court and various High Courts have repeatedly ruled that hoardings which are hazardous and a disturbance to safe traffic movement should be removed. Steps have been taken to remove such hoardings in several states, such as Delhi, Punjab, Haryana, Tamil Nadu and Himachal Pradesh. It is surprising that the authorities in Karnataka in general and, Mysore in particular, are not taking any action on these dangerous hoardings.  

In  M. C. Mehta  Vs. Union of India and Others PIL, the Supreme Court ordered on 20-11-97: 'Civic authorities including the Delhi Development Authority, the railways, the police and transport authorities are directed to identify and remove all hoardings which are on the roadsides and which are hazardous and a disturbance to safe traffic movement...We direct carrying out of these orders notwithstanding any other order/directions by any authority, court, tribunal and no authority shall interfere with the functioning of the police.'

Following the above order of the Supreme Court, public interest litigations against roadside hoardings have been initiated in several states and High Courts have passed similar orders. Appeals against these orders have been dismissed by the Supreme Court. Advertisers have appealed against an order passed by the Madras High Court and the Supreme Court  dismissed their appeal on 16-4-01. Chandigarh administration objected to an order by the Punjab and Haryana High Court saying that it would lead to a huge loss of revenue, but the Supreme Court dismissed its appeal on 27-9-04. 

When Delhi High Court ruled that all hoardings near and facing roads are traffic hazards and ordered their removal, the Municipal Corporation of Delhi went in appeal before the Supreme Court. In the appeal, MCD argued that studies conducted by expert bodies (School of Planning and Architecture, Delhi and Centre for Advance Research on Transportation, Calcutta) have revealed that there is no connection or relation between advertisements and accidents and that there is no evidence that all hoardings near and facing roads are traffic hazards. The Supreme Court asked the Environmental Pollution Control Authority of the Central Pollution Control Board to study these objections and prepare a report.

Such a report has been prepared and is available on the internet. EPCA heard various stakeholders such as the Railways, Delhi Metro, major advertising agencies and MCD. Based on a global literature survey, EPCA concluded that the two studies cited by MCD had serious flaws in their research methodology and hence came to wrong conclusions. EPCA also concluded that
a. The effect of hoardings on traffic safety is real. However, it is situation-specific. There is overwhelming evidence that signs and billboards can be a threat to road safety.
b. Almost all studies agree that too much 'visual clutter' at or near intersections and junctions can interfere with drivers' visual search strategies and lead to accidents.

Based on the EPCA report, MCD came out with the Delhi Outdoor Advertising Policy, 2008 (pdf link) finalized according to the directions of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, while approving the outdoor advertising policy, agreed with the contention of EPCA that though the advertisement policy has been drafted by MCD, the same is applicable to the entire city including advertisements placed on Railway, Delhi Metro and private properties. The Delhi Outdoor Advertising Policy, 2008 can be taken as a model policy for all the cities in India.

Under this policy, advertisement promoting drugs, alcohol, cigarette or tobacco items or propagating exploitation of women are prohibited. Illuminated advertisements with lights going on and off are also prohibited. Generators to provide power for outdoor hoardings are also not allowed. Violations of these conditions are common in Mysore.

It is interesting that the policy also prohibits signs which can not be quickly and easily interpreted as they would increase the period of distraction. So letters should not occupy more than 20% of the sign!

The policy does not permit large billboards on footpaths. They are also not allowed in residential areas or within 75 m of any road junction or traffic intersection or within 75 m of another billboard. They are also not allowed on road medians. Violations of these conditions are common in Mysore.

Since the Supreme Court order to remove hazardous hoardings in Delhi, PILs have been filed in many states and the High Courts have given similar orders. The state government and Mysore City Corporation should formulate a hoarding policy similar to that of Delhi before someone files a PIL and forces them to do so. 

Dwarkanath Narayan, Mysore Grahakara Parishat