Take the pledge to vote

For a better tommorow#AajSawaroApnaKal
  • I agree to receive emails from News18

  • I promise to vote in this year's elections no matter what the odds are.
  • Please check above checkbox.

    SUBMIT

Thank you for
taking the pledge

Vote responsibly as each vote counts
and makes a diffrence

Disclaimer:

Issued in public interest by HDFC Life. HDFC Life Insurance Company Limited (Formerly HDFC Standard Life Insurance Company Limited) (“HDFC Life”). CIN: L65110MH2000PLC128245, IRDAI Reg. No. 101 . The name/letters "HDFC" in the name/logo of the company belongs to Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited ("HDFC Limited") and is used by HDFC Life under an agreement entered into with HDFC Limited. ARN EU/04/19/13618
LIVE TV DownloadNews18 App
News18 English
»
1-min read

No Outdoor Ads in Bengaluru as Karnataka High Court Stays Its Own Order

The Palike’s August 8, 2018 resolution of a year-long ban was challenged by a group of advertisers who argued that they made a living out of commercial advertisements and that several employees were rendered jobless since the resolution came into effect.

Stacy Pereira | CNN-News18

Updated:February 7, 2019, 10:41 PM IST
facebookTwitterskypewhatsapp
No Outdoor Ads in Bengaluru as Karnataka High Court Stays Its Own Order
File photo of Karnataka High Court building. (Image: http://karnatakajudiciary.kar.nic.in/)
Loading...

Bengaluru: In an interesting turn of events, a two-judge bench comprising the Interim Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court on Thursday put a stay on the single bench order that quashed the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagar Palike’s resolution of banning outdoor advertisements for a year.

The order that was delivered on Wednesday by Justice Sunil Dutt Yadav, was challenged through a writ petition by the BBMP. In response to the single bench order which questioned the power of the BBMP to pass such a resolution, the civic body stated that it was empowered to pass a resolution as per the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976.

The Palike’s August 8, 2018 resolution of a year-long ban was challenged by a group of advertisers who argued that they made a living out of commercial advertisements and that several employees were rendered jobless since the resolution came into effect.

The resolution was brought about keeping in mind the beauty of the city, environmental pollution and increasing road accidents, which the people claimed that the hoardings and posters were spoiling.

Now, with the two-judge bench putting aside the earlier order, a status quo has come about, where advertisers will have to make an appeal in a higher court in order to get any relief.

The BBMP counsel had pleaded that the civic agency’s contentions were not considered by the single-judge bench and hence had to appeal through a writ petition.

The Wednesday order, however, specified that it shouldn't be misinterpreted in order to deter the BBMP from initiating action against illegal advertisements and the Palike should continue to punish those according to the existing law provided under the Act and Advertisement Bye-laws 2006.

| Edited by: Ahona Sengupta
Read full article
Loading...
Next Story
Next Story

Also Watch

facebookTwitterskypewhatsapp
 
 

Live TV

Loading...
Countdown To Elections Results
  • 01 d
  • 12 h
  • 38 m
  • 09 s
To Assembly Elections 2018 Results