Date:24/01/2006 URL: http://www.thehindu.com/2006/01/24/stories/2006012406540500.htm

Tamil Nadu - Others

Ruling on functions in stadium stayed

J. Venkatesan

Madras High Court quashed an amendment to a Government Order

Stadium can hold large number of people
G.O. ensured there would be no damage to playing area

As it is policy decision, the court should not have interfered with it

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday stayed the judgment of the Madras High Court quashing an amendment to a Government Order (GO) permitting holding of functions at Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium in Chennai without any damage to the track.

A Bench of Justice B.N. Agrawal and Justice A.K. Mathur granted stay of the impugned judgment dated October 4, 2005 while admitting a special leave petition filed by the Tamil Nadu government challenging the judgment. It issued notice to the respondent K. Senthil Kumar (who was the petitioner before the High Court).

A G.O. was issued in September 2005 by way of an amendment to an earlier G.O. issued in August 1998 by which government functions were permitted to be organised in the stadium subject to strict safeguards.

This was done to allow the holding of farmers' meet that was attended by Chief Minister Jayalalithaa.

The High Court though permitted the function to go on, quashed the G.O. holding that the amendment was arbitrary, unreasonable and it suffered from colourable exercise of power.

Assailing the judgment, the SLP said that for one public interest, namely protection of the stadium, other public interests could not be sacrificed. It said, "if government functions wherein [a] large number of people are expected to assemble are held in open grounds, a colossal amount of money (taxpayers money) would be spent in organising the event. Such places would not be as safe as a stadium as there will be always a threat of stampede."

The SLP maintained that the stadium was well equipped to hold a large number of people and was best suited to ensure assembling and disbursement of people quickly.

It said that the High Court failed to appreciate that the G.O. while relaxing the use of the stadium only for government functions had ensured that there should be no damage to the track and playing area. Being a policy decision, the High Court ought not to have interfered with it, the SLP said and sought quashing of the impugned judgment and an interim stay of its operation.