IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI ANIL R. DAVE AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.26424 OF 2009 Dt.04.12.2009 Between: M.A.K. Mukheed … Petitioner And The Government of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Principal Secretary G.A.D., Secretariat Building, Hyderabad and others … Respondents THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI ANIL R. DAVE AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.26424 OF 2009 ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy) The petitioner, who is a practising Advocate, filed this Writ Petition in the name of public interest for a Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in allowing statues of leaders of various political parties to be erected in the middle of the roads as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of the provisions of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporations Act, 1955 and the A.P. Municipalities Act, 1965. At the hearing, Sri G. Arun Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the respondents have been indiscriminately allowing statues to be erected in the middle of the city roads and in various other places in the State of Andhra Pradesh causing obstruction to the traffic. He also submitted that the respondents have been permitting erection of statues of relatives of political leaders and also other persons, who did not sacrifice their life for the cause of public. The learned Counsel pointed out that representations dt.10.8.2009 and 10.9.2009 were made to the respondents to take appropriate action, but no such action has been taken. We have carefully considered the submissions of the learned Counsel for the petitioner and perused the material. The allegations made by the petitioner are vague and generic in nature. No specific instances have been cited. The photographs filed by the petitioner in support of the allegation that erection of statues is causing obstruction to the traffic, do not substantiate this allegation. From each of the photographs filed by the petitioner, it is evident that they are erected either in the center of the road within the traffic island or at a corner of the road margin. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has not cited ay provision of law which, prohibits erection of such statues. Unless the petitioner makes out a case of serious public inconvenience by way of obstruction of traffic, it is not possible for this Court to interfere with the erection of statues wherever the respondents find it necessary to do so. With regard to the allegation that the statues of persons who did not contribute to the society are permitted to be erected, the petitioner failed to give any instance in this regard. Therefore, on the basis of such a vague and unsubstantiated allegation, this Court cannot entertain this Writ Petition. The Writ Petition is therefore dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Petition, W.P.M.P. No.34406 of 2009, filed by the petitioner for interim relief, is dismissed as infructuous. ______________ ANIL R. DAVE, CJ ______________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 04.12.2009 bnr