Item No. 25 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL WP(C) No. 564 of 2019 M/S Bell Advertising Agency & Anr. …..Petitioner/s - Versus – State of Manipur & Ors. .... Respondent/s BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA Order 18.11.2025 [1] Heard Mr. N. Umakanta, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. Kh. Sapna, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Th. Sukumar, learned G.A. for the State respondent. [2] The two petitioners are Registered Proprietary Firms dealing in advertising for reputed firms and doing business in this field as part of their business for the last more than 50 (fifty) years. The petitioners’ firms have erected certain hoardings and signboards allegedly in private land. It is submitted that the officials of the MAHUD came and instruction them to take down. [3] Mr. N. Umakanta, learned senior counsel for the petitioners, draws the attention to the order dated 15.12.2022 issued by the Commissioner (Home), Government of Manipur recalling display of hoardings in Government land and private land. [4] The order dated 15.12.2022 is annexed along with counter affidavit filed by the State respondent before this Court. In para 5 of the order dated 15.12.2022, It is stated that hoardings in public places including Government buildings and structures, National Highways, State Highways, Roads, etc. cannot be done without prior permission from the State Government/competent authority through District Magistrate concerned. However, this order shall not be applicable in case of advertising hoardings, signboards, banners, etc. displayed on private properties, subject to appropriateness of the content in such hoardings and displays as per law. [5] Mr. N. Umakanta, learned senior counsel for the petitioners, has pointed out that the hoardings and other signboards erected by the petitioners are amicable in private land and the same are permissible in absence of any objection on law and order. It is submitted that the petitioners be permitted to carry on business of display of hoardings and signboards in private places as per permissible by order dated 15.12.2022. [6] However, Mr. Th. Sukumar, learned G.A., refers to the various annexures showing hoardings and signboards put up by the petitioners’ firms and has pointed out that even though the hoardings are on private land but they are adjacent to the National Highways and other public roads which may be dangerous to the public. [7] This Court has perused the materials on record and considered the submissions made at the bar. For clear understanding of the matter, it will be appropriate to produce para 5 of the order dated 15.12.2025 issued by the Commissioner (Home), Government of Manipur recalling erection of the signboards, statues, etc. in public places. Para 5 of the order dated 15.12.2025 is reproduced as: “5. Now therefore, in view of the above, the Governor of Manipur is pleased to order that no statues, advertising hoardings, signboards, banners, etc shall be put up in public places, including Government Buildings and structures, National Highways, State Highways, Roads, etc. without obtaining prior permission from the State Government/competent authority through the District Magistrate concerned. However, this order shall not be applicable in case of advertising hoardings, signboards, banners etc. displaed on private properties, subject to appropriateness of the content in such hoardings and displays in terms of the likely implication thereof on law and order and and security of the State. Owners of the land/property shall be held responsible for any hoarding or display put up on private property/land, for any action sought to be taken under law in this regards.” [8] In the present case, admittedly, the hoardings seem to be on private land adjacent to public roads. Para 5 of the order dated 15.12.2022 prohibits erection of display of advertising hoardings, signboards, banners, etc. in public places without permission of the authorities. However, restriction will not be applicable to the hoardings and displaying in private property in para 5 of the order. [9] Considering this, writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the State respondents to raise any objection to the hoardings erected by the petitioners as to whether the same is in terms of the order dated 15.12.2022 issued by the State Government. Before taking any adverse order, the petitioners be given an opportunity of being heard and explaining their case. Until a decision is taken by the State authority, after giving due opportunity to the petitioners, the hoardings in question shall not be disturbed. [10] With this observation, writ petition is disposed of. Interim order is merged with the final order. JUDGE Kh. Joshua Maring KH. JOSHUA MARING Digitally signed by KH. JOSHUA MARING Date: 2025.11.19 10:12:20 +05'30'