V. P. MOHAN KUMAR, J. ( 1 ) PETITIONER here in applied to the 1st respondent to permit him to erect display board on the side of the public roads. He chose the following points in this behalf, namely,"1. K. r. puram railway station 2. Hoodi circle 3. In front of tata elexi 4. Near forest office (suri and nayar) 5. Near munne kollalu sethuve 6. A. e. c. s. extension (kundalahalli) 7. Near hope farm 8. Kadugodi railway station 9. Whitefield main road 10. Chellaghatta main road". the application was submitted on 2-2-1999 and on receipt of the application it appears the 1st respondent addressed the letter to the 2nd respondent to secure their opinion. It is alleged that the assistant engineer of the 2nd respondent approved the erection of the hoarding. Thereafter Annexure-A permission was issued by the 1st respondent. Subsequently the petitioner erected the hoarding at various places indicated in Annexure-A order. The petitioner remitted the licence fee stipulated by the 1st respondent and invested, it is claimed, substantial amount for the erection of the hoarding. While so, it is alleged by the petitioner that claiming that three of the sites permitted are located within the roads under the control of the 2nd respondent and therefore they called upon the petitioner to remove the hoarding. That necessitated this writ petition. ( 2 ) THE contesting 2nd respondent appeared and has filed a statement of objection. Their contention is that the roads described in annexure-r1 have been put under their control by the state and that the 1st respondent cannot exercise any right over the same, that the 1st respondent cannot licence any person to place any hoarding on the side of the said road without the permission of the 2nd respondent, the alleged permission granted by the assistant engineer is not binding on them as he had no authority to grant the permission, that the right to erect hoarding can be farmed out only after due publicity, that there was no oblique motive in the action of the 3rd respondent in instructing the petitioner to remove the hoarding as alleged, that by virtue of the governmental grant the right to manage and control the road referred to in the government grant belongs to them and that the petitioner cannot maintain the writ petition. ( 3 ) THE disputed roads are the following: