Judgment :- A.P. SHAH, C.J. The above said writ petitions are being disposed of by this common order as the issue involved in these petitions is common. The controversy relates to the advertisement hoardings erected on the stretch of the National Highway No. 45 (NH-45), starting from Kathipara Junction to Pallavaram, which is running parallel to the Chennai Airport. 2. W.P. No. 28384 of 2005 has been filed by the Airports Authority of India, International Airport Division, Chennai Airport, Chennai, to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order in the nature of the writ directing the respondents therein to remove all the hoardings erected in the stretch of NH-45 from Kathipara Junction to Pallavaram, for ensuring the safety of Air Navigations in Chennai Airport, as per Article 28 of the Convention of International Civil Aviation and the Notification No.S.O.988, Ministry of Civil Aviation, Government of India, dated 5.1.1988 read with Rule 65 of the Aircraft Rules, 1937 and the consequential G.O.Ms.No. 20, Highways (HV2) Department, dated 16.8.1996. 3. W.P. No. 11915 of 2003, etc. batch of writ petitions have been filed by the hoarding owners, challenging the notices issued by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (TNEB) calling upon them to furnish No Objection Certificate from the competent authorities in respect of the hoardings erected by them on the said stretch of NH-45, failing which the power supply to the hoardings would be disconnected. 4. W.P. Nos. 9977 of 2005 etc. batch of writ petitions have been filed by the private hoarding owners to issue a writ of prohibition or other appropriate writ or order in the nature of a writ prohibiting the respondents therein from interfering with the hoardings erected by them on the basis of the permission granted by the respondents 1,2 and 4 therein. 5. W.P. No. 14695 of 2005 etc. batch of writ petitions have been filed challenging the validity of the G.O.Ms. No. 20, Highways (HV2) Department, dated 16.8.1996 and the consequential notices in proceedings No. 460/2004/Assistant, dated 22.4.2005 and to quash the same. 6. For the sake of convenience and for better appreciation of the fact-situation, we will take up the facts, in brief, as stated in W.P. No. 28384 of 2005, filed by the Airports Authority of India, Chennai Airport. 7. 6. For the sake of convenience and for better appreciation of the fact-situation, we will take up the facts, in brief, as stated in W.P. No. 28384 of 2005, filed by the Airports Authority of India, Chennai Airport. 7. The Airports Authority of India is a statutory authority constituted under Section 3 of the Airports Authority of India Act, 1994 (Act 55 of 1994). By Section 12 of the said Act, the Airports Authority of India (in short ‘the Authority’) is empowered to take the responsibility for the air traffic, operations, control and safety and to ensure safety and smooth functioning of the Airports, Air Traffic, Air Navigation, Aircraft Operations and other allied matters. 8. The Chennai Airport is situated in a precarious area for many reasons. First, the to pography of the Chennai Airport. On the eastern side, the airport is abutting the foot of St. Thomas Mount and on the southern side, it is abutting Thirisoolam Hill. The corridor for landing and take-off of the aircraft is restricted from two sides, leaving a narrow avenue between the two hills. For this reason, the air-crafts, while take-off and landing, have to negotiate these two hills. In the said narrow avenue between these two hills, the stretch of NH-45 from Kathipara Junction to Pallavaram runs parallel to the primary Runway, viz., RWY 25 and the distance between the NH-45 and RWY- 25 is less than 500 meters. In between RWY 25 and NH-45 there is only a small compound wall, which almost pales into insignificance while viewing it from the air. 9. Secondly, apart from the above typographical deficiency, on the either side of NH45, starting from Kathipara Junction and Pallavaram, several advertisement hoardings of gigantic heights, fitted with bright focusing lights for illumination (herein after referred to as ‘the false lights’) have been erected by the private hoarding owners. The intensity, configuration and reflection of colours from these false lights exhibited within the close radius of the runways, creates confusion in the minds of the Pilots, more particularly those who are new to the Chennai Airport, in distinguishing these false lights and identifying the aeronautical beacon and aeronautical ground lights for landing the flight. It is all the more difficult when the visibility is poor due to bad weather conditions. It is all the more difficult when the visibility is poor due to bad weather conditions. Not only the false lights, but even the very presence of the advertisement hoardings of huge heights within the close vicinity of the Chennai Airport is a potential flight hazard, especially during emergency landings. 10. Taking into account the potential danger posed by the false lights illuminating the advertisement hoardings and the very presence of the hoardings in the close vicinity of the Chennai Airport, the State Government, to ensure the safety of aircraft operations of the Chennai Airport, has issued G.O.Ms. No. 20 Highways (HV2) Department dated 16.8.1996, declaring the stretch of NH-45, from K.M.I 1/7 (Kathipara Junction) to K.M.19/6 (Pallavaram) as Hoarding Free Zone (in short HFZ). The Chief Engineer (National Highways), Madras was also directed not to renew the existing leases in order to regulate the erection of hoardings by the private hoarding owners in HFZ. 11. It appears that in spite of G.O.Ms. No. 20, the private hoarding owners, with the connivance of the local body officials and the municipal authorities, have erected several advertising hoardings with gigantic heights in the HFZ and that they have also obtained power supply from the TNEB to illuminate the hoardings during night times. 12. The Airport Authority has received several written complaints from the Pilots complaining about the confusion created by the blending of the false lights with the runway lights. As early as 28.5.2003 the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO), Bangkong has brought this problem to the notice of the Director General of Civil Aviation, New Delhi. In the said letter, ICAO has reminded the States of their responsibility under Article 28 of the Convention on International Civil Aviation (DOC 7300) for providing Air Navigation facilities and services. In the list of deficiencies pointed out by the Asia pacific Air Navigation Planning and Implementation Regional Group (APANPIRG) in respect of the Chennai Airport, it has been clearly mentioned as follows: “Runway 25, potential hazard as runaway lighting blends with road lights and is difficult to differentiate”. This deficiency was communicated to the Airport Director, Chennai Airport, Chennai by the Authority, New Delhi and the Airport Director was directed to take necessary corrective action in respect of the above deficiency in the Chennai Airport. This problem was time and again discussed in the meetings of the Airfield Environment Management Committee (AEMC). This deficiency was communicated to the Airport Director, Chennai Airport, Chennai by the Authority, New Delhi and the Airport Director was directed to take necessary corrective action in respect of the above deficiency in the Chennai Airport. This problem was time and again discussed in the meetings of the Airfield Environment Management Committee (AEMC). Very recently, a Pilot has made a written complaint on this problem, which finds an entry into the Air Traffic Control Tower Log Book, which reads as follows: “Subject: Hoardings on Approach Path of RWY 25 The following is an extract from the ATC Tower Log Book. Quote: QBM-IAC 540, after landing on RWY 25, reported that certain hoardings placed on approach path of RWY 25 observed to be lighted with very bright lights, which is not good considering safety of flight operations - Unquote” 13. Based on these complaints, expeditious action was sought for by the Authority and several reminders have been issued to the National Highways Authority, Electricity Board, Municipal authorities and the local bodies concerned to take early action for removal of the hoardings erected on either side of the stretch of NH-45, starting from Kathipara Junction to Pallavaram. Finding that the municipal authorities and the local authorities concerned continue to grant and/or renew the licences to the private hoarding owners for erection of hoardings in the prohibited zone, the petitioner Authority has filed the above writ petition, seeking the relief as stated above. 14. At this stage, we may refer to the relevant provisions of the Aircraft Act, 1934 and the Aircraft Rules, 1937. Section 9-A of the Aircraft Act, which deals with the power of the Central Government to prohibit or regulate construction of buildings, planting of trees, etc., reads as follows: 9-A. Power of Central Government to prohibit or regulate construction of buildings, planting of trees, etc. Section 9-A of the Aircraft Act, which deals with the power of the Central Government to prohibit or regulate construction of buildings, planting of trees, etc., reads as follows: 9-A. Power of Central Government to prohibit or regulate construction of buildings, planting of trees, etc. (1) If the Central Government is of the opinion that it is necessary or expedient so to do for the safety of aircraft operations, it may, by notification in the Official Gazette: - (i) direct that no building or structure shall be constructed or erected, or no tree shall be planted on any land within such radius, not exceeding twenty kilometers from the aerodrome reference point, as may be specified in the notification and where there is any building, structure or tree on such land, also direct the owner or the person having control of such building, structure or tree to demolish such building or structure or, as the case may be, to cut such tree within such period as may be specified in the notification; (ii) direct that no building or structure higher than such height as may be specified in the notification shall be constructed or erected, or no tree, which is likely to grow or ordinarily grows higher than such height as may be specified in the notification, shall be planted, on any land within such radius, not exceeding twenty kilometers from the aerodrome reference point, as may be specified in the notification and where the height of any building or structure or tree on such land is higher than the specified height, also direct the owner or the person having control of such building, structure or tree to reduce the height thereof so as not to exceed the specified height, within such period as may be specified in the notification. (2) In specifying the radius under clause (i) or clause (ii) of sub-section (1) and in specifying the height of any building, structure or tree under the said clause (ii), the Central Government shall have regard to - (a) the nature of the aircraft operated or intended to be operated in the aerodrome; and (b) the international standards and recommended practices governing the operations of aircraft. (3) Where any notification has been issued under sub-section (1) directing the owner or the person having control of any building, structure or tree to demolish such building or structure or to cut such tree or to reduce the height of any building, structure or tree, a copy of the notification containing such direction shall be served on the owner or the person having the control of the building, structure or tree, as the case may be: - (i) by delivering or tendering it to such owner or person; or (ii) if it cannot be so delivered or tendered, by delivering or tendering it to any officer of such owner or person or any adult male member of the family of such owner or person or by affixing a copy thereof on the outer door or on some conspicuous part of the premises in which such owner or person is known to have last resided or carried on business or personally worked for gain; or failing service by these means; (iii) by post. (4) Every person shall be bound by to comply with any direction contained in any notification issued under sub-section (1)“. 15. We may also advert to Rules 65 and 66 of the Aircraft Rules, 1937, which speak about the ‘Aeronautical beacon and aeronautical ground lights’ and ‘false lights’ respectively. The said rules read as under: ”65. Aeronautical beacon and aeronautical ground lights: (1) No aeronautical beacon or aeronautical ground light shall be established or maintained within India nor shall the character of the light exhibited therefrom be altered except with the approval in writing of the Central Government and subject to such conditions as may be prescribed. (2) No person shall willfully or negligently endanger or interfere with any aeronautical beacon or aeronautical ground light established or maintained by or with the approval of the Central Government or any light exhibited therefrom. 66. (2) No person shall willfully or negligently endanger or interfere with any aeronautical beacon or aeronautical ground light established or maintained by or with the approval of the Central Government or any light exhibited therefrom. 66. False lights: (1) Whenever in India any light is exhibited - (a) in the vicinity of an aerodrome or an aeronautical beacon within a radius of 5 kilometers, so as to be liable to be mistaken for an aeronautical ground light or an aeronautical beacon; or (b) which by reason of its liability to be mistaken for an aeronautical ground light or an aeronautical beacon is calculated to endanger the safety of an aircraft; or (c) which being in the vicinity of an aerodrome is liable by reason of its glare to endanger the safety of an aircraft arriving at or departing from the aerodrome; or (d) which may prevent or cause confusion by reason of its intensity, configuration or colour in the clear interpretation of visual aids for navigation denoting obstacles or restricted use areas, the Central Government may serve a notice upon the owner or person in possession of the place where the light is exhibited or upon the person having charge of the light, directing that owner or person, within a reasonable time to be specified in the notice, to take effectual means for extinguishing or for effectually screening the light and for preventing for the future the exhibition of any similar light. (2) The notice may be served either personally or by post, or by affixing the same in some conspicuous place near to the light to which the notice relates. (3) an owner or person on whom a notice under sub-rule (1) has been served shall, in the absence of reasonable cause, the absence of proving which shall be upon him, comply with the directions contained in the notice. (4) If any owner or person on whom a notice under this rule is served, neglects for a period of seven days to extinguish or effectually to screen the light mentioned in the notice, the Central Government may enter upon the place where the light is and forthwith extinguish the same, doing no unnecessary damage.“ 16. (4) If any owner or person on whom a notice under this rule is served, neglects for a period of seven days to extinguish or effectually to screen the light mentioned in the notice, the Central Government may enter upon the place where the light is and forthwith extinguish the same, doing no unnecessary damage.“ 16. In exercise of the powers conferred under Section 9-A of the Aircrafts Act, 1934, the Central Government issued a notification, S.O. 988, Ministry of Civil Aviation, dated 5.1.1988, which reads as follows: ”In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 9-A of the Aircraft Act, 1934 (22 of 1934) and in supersession of the notification of the Government of India in the erstwhile Ministry of Tourism and Civil Aviation No. G.S.R. 516, dated the 15.3.1979, the Central Government, being of the opinion that it is necessary and expedient so to do for the safety of aircraft operations hereby direct that: (i) No building or structure shall be constructed or erected, or no tree shall be planted, on any land within the limit specified in Annexure I to this notification in respect of Civil and Military Aerodromes existing as listed in Annexure III to this notification, aerodromes to be constructed or developed and notified by the competent authority in future where there is any building, structure or tree on such land, the owner or the person having control of such building, structure or tree shall demolish such building or structure or, as the case may be, or such tree forthwith but not later than a period of one month from the date of publication of this notification in this Official Gazettee; (ii) No building or structure higher than the height specified in Annexure II to this notification shall be constructed or created, or no tree which is likely to grow or ordinarily grows higher than the height specified in the said Annexure II, shall be planted, on any land within a radius of twenty kilometers from the aerodrome reference point (ARP) of the aerodromes listed in Annexure III to this notification excluding the land covered by Annexure I to this notification or aerodromes which would be constructed or developed and notified by the competent authority from time to time, where the height of any building or structure or tree on such land is higher than the height specified in the said Annexure II, the owner or the person having control of such building, structure, or tree shall forthwith but not later than a period of one month from the date of publication of this notification in the Official Gazettee, reduce the height thereof so as not to exceed the specified height.“ Annexure I to the said notification reads as follows: ” ‘(a) Approach Funnel “ - (i) In relation to an instrument runway, means the area in the shape of an isosceles trapezium having the longer parallel side 4800 meters long (2400 meters on either side of the extended centre line of the runway) and small parallel side 300 meters long (150 meters on either side of the extended centre line of the runway) where the smaller and longer parallel sides are placed at a distance of 60 meters and 15060 meters respectively, from the end of the runway and at right angles to the extended centre line; (ii) In relation to a non-instrument runway, means the area in the shape of an isosceles trapezium having the longer parallel side 1800 meters long (900 meters on either side of the extended centre line of the runway) and smaller parallel side 180 meters long (90 meters on either side of the extended centre line runway), where the smaller and longer parallel sides are placed at a distance of 50 meters and 6540 meters, respectively from the end of the runway and at right angles to the extended centre line. Thereafter, the trapezium is followed by the contiguous rectangular area of that width for the remainder of the length up to a distance of 15060 meters from the end of runway. (b) ‘Instrument runway’ means a runway served by visual aid or aids providing directional guidance adequate for a straight in approach and intended for the operation of aircraft using instrument approach procedures.” 17. Learned counsel appearing for the Airport Authority submitted that Chennai Airport has two air terminals, viz. Domestic and International Air Terminals. These two air-terminals handle a total of 169 flights per day and out of these 57 flights are international flights. On an average, 17,540 passengers are flying and landing through these two air-terminals. For any accident or deficiency in air safety of these flights and the passengers, the petitioner Authority will be held liable and is squarely responsible. Learned counsel submitted that the problem of false lights in the close radius of the runway of the Chennai Airport has got the potential to develop into a civil aviation crisis at the international level, compromising the international standards of civil aviation. Already this issue has been discussed in the international bodies and they have warned the Civil Aviation Ministry by duly bringing to their notice and requested to conform to the standards of the International Air Safety. Learned counsel submitted that despite the repeated requests from the Authority, the National Highways Authority as well as the local bodies concerned Have not taken any steps for removal of the hoardings, which have been illegally erected in the HFZ. 18. Learned Government Pleader, learned standing counsel appearing for the National Highways Authority and the learned counsel appearing for the local bodies and other authorities fairly stated that action will be taken against all the hoarding owners who have erected the hoardings illegally in the HFZ and all such hoardings will be removed. 19. Mr.Gnanadesikan, learned counsel appearing for the hoarding owners has not disputed that the false lights emanate from the hoardings and the very presence of the hoardings in the close radius of the Chennai Airport is not conducive for the air safety of the flights and the passengers. Learned counsel, however, submitted that the State Government has no power to issue a Government Order of a general nature prohibiting the erection of hoardings in the said stretch of NH-45. Learned counsel, however, submitted that the State Government has no power to issue a Government Order of a general nature prohibiting the erection of hoardings in the said stretch of NH-45. According to the learned counsel, it is for the Central Government and the Airport Authority of India to take appropriate action against the erection of hoardings and that too on case to case basis. Learned counsel further submitted that the hoardings in question are there for more than a decade and, therefore, there is no warrant for issuing an order directing removal of these hoardings and introducing a complete ban on erection of the hoardings as was sought to be done under the impugned Government Order. Learned counsel urged that the provisions of the Aircraft Act and the Aircraft Rules merely talk about the height of the building/structure in the vicinity of the airport and not the total removal of the structure. 20. In our opinion, there is absolutely no substance in the challenge to the validity of G.O.Ms. No. 20 dated 16.8.1996. There is no dispute on the fact that the stretch of NH-45 from Kathipara Junction (KM 11/7) to Pallavaram (KM 19/6) has been declared as Hoarding Free Zone because of the sensitivity of the area due to the landing of aircrafts. The said area is the gateway for Runway No. 25, which is the main runway of the Chennai Airport. The said area is falling within a radius of 2 kms. From the Threshold Line of the said runway. The Aircraft Act and the rules framed thereunder stipulate that the vicinity of the aerodrome upto a radium of 5 kms, must be free of any misleading false lights. Rule 65 of the Aircraft Rules, 1937 provides that any light in the vicinity of the aerodrome by reason of its glare that will endanger the safety of an aircraft, by intensity, configuration and colour, must be totally avoided. The false lights from the hoardings erected on NH-45 from Kathipara Junction to Pallavaram is blending with the approach lights of the runway. The extended centre line of the runway, stretching from Kathipara Junction, falls within the above area for the reason of the final approach for landing. That area and the lights thereof are very crucial for the pilots, for safe navigation and landing. The extended centre line of the runway, stretching from Kathipara Junction, falls within the above area for the reason of the final approach for landing. That area and the lights thereof are very crucial for the pilots, for safe navigation and landing. The pilots have to find the alignment with the centre line of the runway, in a tangent of glide slope, only by seeing the approach lights from far away across the funnel. The false lights from the hoardings and their reflection mix with the approach lights in the funnel, interrupting the said alignment. The required length of the approach lights (900 meters) is not available in RWY-25, which is already a permanent constraint in Chennai Airport. This problem is more precipitated because of the false lights from the hoardings erected in the close radius of the Chennai Airport. The alignment of the centre line of the runway has to be done in the fraction of a second by the pilot, who is flying an aircraft at a speed of 200 nautical miles (360 Km/Ph) while touching the runway and any error of judgment would lead to disastrous consequences. The confusion in the blending of false lights from the hoardings with the approach lights may lead to miscalculation of the threshold lights of the runway, resulting in the undershooting of the aircraft, that is landing before the actual runway. This is a potential hazard, leading to disastrous consequences compromising the safety norms stipulated by the laws of the International Civil Aviation Organisation and confirmed by the domestic law. 21. Therefore, in the above circumstances, we are of the view that the Government of Tamil Nadu was fully justified in issuing G.O.Ms. No. 20, Highways (HV2) Department, dated 16.8.1996 declaring the stretch of NH-45 from Kathipara Junction (KM 11/7) to Pallavaram (KM 19/6) as Hoarding Free Zone. Once the State Government has declared the said stretch of NH-45 as Hoarding Free Zone, it is not permissible for the municipal authorities and other local bodies to grant and/or renew licences to the private hoarding agencies for erection of hoardings in the prohibited area. 22. Once the State Government has declared the said stretch of NH-45 as Hoarding Free Zone, it is not permissible for the municipal authorities and other local bodies to grant and/or renew licences to the private hoarding agencies for erection of hoardings in the prohibited area. 22. One Vantage Advertising Private Limited has filed an affidavit before us stating that they have been given licence to develop, operate and maintain the property located from KM 14/5 to 16/2 (right side) from Airport Cargo entrance to the junction of Cement Road on GST Road (NH-45) for a period of five years and that they have landscaped about 1,25,000/- sq. ft. of land in the said stretch and has changed the very ambience of the area. Learned counsel appearing for the said third party submitted that pursuant to the interim order passed by us on 7.9.2006, Electricity Board has disconnected the power supply to the landscaped areas. Learned counsel submitted that electricity was being used to water the areas through water pumps and for lighting the lawn, etc. and the disconnection of power supply is causing hardship to the company. Learned counsel, therefore, prayed that power supply may be restored to enable the company to continue their landscaping operations. Learned counsel appearing for the Airport Authority has no objection for restoration of power supply, but stated that the lighting equipment in the landscaped area should not pose any danger to the air safety of the flights. We direct the restoration of the power supply to the landscaped areas maintained by the said company. We, however, make it clear that the lighting equipment fitted in the landscaped areas shall be focused downwards and only the minimum required illumination of the area shall be done. 23. We also make it clear that the bus-shelters located in the said stretch of NH-45 will not be covered by our order and, therefore, the power supply to the bus-shelters are directed to be restored forthwith. 24. There is also a civil suit, Tr.C.S. No. 10 of 2001 listed along with these writ petitions. It is submitted that the licence period has already been expired and hoarding has been removed, and therefore, nothing survives in the said suit. Accordingly, Tr.C.S. No. 10 of 2001 is dismissed as infructuous. 25. In the result, in view of the foregoing discussion, we hold that the G.O.Ms. It is submitted that the licence period has already been expired and hoarding has been removed, and therefore, nothing survives in the said suit. Accordingly, Tr.C.S. No. 10 of 2001 is dismissed as infructuous. 25. In the result, in view of the foregoing discussion, we hold that the G.O.Ms. No. 20, Highways (HV2) Department, dated 16.8.1996 declaring the stretch of NH-45 from Kathipara Junction (KM 11/7) to Pallavaram (KM 19/6) as Hoarding Free Zone is legal and valid and consequently, the hoardings erected by the advertising agencies on the said stretch of NH-45 are liable to be removed. Accordingly, we direct the respondents concerned (R1 to R4, R10 and R11 in W.P. No. 28384 of 2005) to take immediate action for the removal of the hoardings erected in the said prohibited zone and also to ensure that no new hoardings are erected in the Hoardings Free Zone. 26. Accordingly, W.P.Nos.28384 of 2005 is allowed. W.P.Nos. 11915, 12000, 16994 to 16996, 17377 to 17380, 18037, 18074, 18214, 18215, 20095, 20155 and 20226 of 2003, W.P.Nos.9978, 10215, 10216, 10299 to 10301 and 10507 of 2005, W.P.Nos. 14695 to 14697, 14903, 15108 and 15293 of 2005 are dismissed with costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.