JUDGMENT : 1. The present petition has been filed highlighting the issue with regard to installation, removal and re-installation of the statutes of public figures in Gandhi Centre, Nandigama Municipality, NTR District. 2. The petitioner claims that statues of public figures and leaders like Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, Bhagat Singh, A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, Rajiv Gandhi, etc., were installed in a traffic island at a four road junction called Gandhi Centre. It is stated that all around the said island, there is sufficient space for free flow of traffic and pedestrian movement and that the presence of the statues do not cause any inconvenience to the public. It is stated that the said statutes are proposed to be removed from the said traffic island and reinstalled in public spaces, one of which has been identified as Government General Hospital, Nandigama. It is alleged that the removal of the statues is proposed on account of nothing but political considerations. Another issue that has been highlighted is that the authorities are not removing the statue of Dr. Y.S.Rajasekhara Reddy, which was installed in the year 2010 on the Tahsildar office road margin and renovated in the year 2020 with large pylon on the road margin, which extended into public utility space belonging to Tahsildar’s office in Gandhi Centre Junction, thus causing inconvenience to the public at large. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner drew our attention to an order dated 18.01.2013 passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in I.A.No.10 of 2012 in S.L.P. (C) No.8519 of 2006, wherein the following direction has been issued: “4. Until further orders, we direct that the status-quo, as obtaining today, shall be maintained in all respects by all concerned with regard to the Triangle Island where statue of late Shri N.Sundaran Nadar has been permitted to be sanctioned. We further direct that henceforth, State Government shall not grant any permission for installation of any statue or construction of any structures in public roads, pavements, sideways and other public utility places. Obviously, this order shall not apply to installation of high mast lights, street lights or construction relating to electrification, traffic, toll or for development and beautification of the streets, highways, roads etc. and relating to public utility and facilities. 5. The above order shall also apply to all other states and union territories. Obviously, this order shall not apply to installation of high mast lights, street lights or construction relating to electrification, traffic, toll or for development and beautification of the streets, highways, roads etc. and relating to public utility and facilities. 5. The above order shall also apply to all other states and union territories. The concerned Chief Secretary/Administrator shall ensure compliance of the above order.” The directions afore-mentioned were issued in the context of challenge to an order passed by the Government of Kerala which granted permission for installation of statue of late Shri N.Sundaran Nadar, who was Ex-Deputy Speaker of Kerala Legislative Assembly on the National Highway. 4. Before issuance of afore-mentioned direction, the then Government of Andhra Pradesh before bifurcation vide G.O.Ms.No.55, dated 08.04.2003, had envisaged that no new statues should be permitted for erection on any R & B roads and that if statues/monuments are to be located, it should be done so only on large traffic islands, public gardens, parks, premises of Government buildings, town halls or places of public importance. The Government Order also envisaged that in case any approval of Government is required, recommendation by a Statue Committee headed by the District Collector and comprising of Superintendent of Police, Superintending Engineers (R&B), Chairman/CEO, Local Municipal Body, Superintending Engineers (PR), Superintending Engineer (AP Transco) and the concerned Executive Engineer (R&B) was required as mandatory. 5. However, subsequently as a sequel to the aforementioned direction by the Hon’ble Supreme Court by virtue of order dated 18.01.2013, the Government of Andhra Pradesh issued G.O.Ms.No.18, Transport, Roads & Buildings (Roads-1) Department, dated 18.02.2013, which envisages as under: “In pursuance of the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, Government hereby decide not to grant permission for installation of any statue or construction of any structure in public roads, pavements, sideways and other public utility places.” 6. In the backdrop of the afore-mentioned facts, the relief that the petitioner seeks in the present PIL is for declaring the action of the respondents in not removing the statue of Dr. Y.S.Rajasekhara Reddy as being in violation of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court dated 18th February, 2013 and further that the proposal to remove the statues of national leaders be declared as arbitrary, illegal and politically motivated. 7. Y.S.Rajasekhara Reddy as being in violation of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court dated 18th February, 2013 and further that the proposal to remove the statues of national leaders be declared as arbitrary, illegal and politically motivated. 7. The State’s response is reflected in the reply-affidavit filed by the Assistant Executive Engineer (R&B), respondent No.6 in the writ petition, wherein it is stated that the statues of national leaders are proposed to be removed on account of increase in day-to-day vehicular traffic in Gandhi Centre and that the existence of the statues in the middle of the road was leading to traffic congestion. It is stated in the affidavit that removal of the statues would result in free flow of traffic in the area. It is further stated that the statues in question are intended to be shifted and re-located in the premises of Government General Hospital, as per the Municipal Council’s resolution. In regard to the statue of Dr. Y.S.Rajasekhara Reddy, it is stated that the same was installed in the year 2010 in the office premises of the Tahsildar adjoining the compound wall and that there has been no additional construction as was alleged by the petitioner which could be said to be in violation of Government Order dated 18th of February, 2013. 8. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 9. A perusal of the order dated 18th January, 2013 passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court would show that the State Government has been prohibited from granting any permission for installation of any statue or construction of any structure on the public roads, pavements, sideways and other public utility spaces, except for purpose of installation of high mast lights, street lights or construction relating to electrification, traffic, toll or for development and beautification of the streets, highways, roads, etc. This order is applicable to all States and Union Territories. 10. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, following the directions supra by the Hon’ble Apex Court, has reiterated the directions by issuing the Government Order supra. This order is applicable to all States and Union Territories. 10. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, following the directions supra by the Hon’ble Apex Court, has reiterated the directions by issuing the Government Order supra. In our opinion, while the decision to remove the statues of the leaders mentioned hereinabove which are resulting in traffic congestion at Gandhi Centre may be justified, but its re-location and re-installation in premises, such as the Government General Hospital which is a public utility space, may not be permissible in terms of the directions issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court supra as also the Government Order issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh dated 18.02.2013. To that extent we are in agreement with the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner. 11. However, it is difficult for us to accept the argument of learned counsel for the petitioner and hold that the decision to remove the statues of the public figures is politically motivated, as material on record does not satisfy us to accept that plea, especially when the petitioner accepts the claim that they are installed in the centre of the road, may be in a traffic island. 12. The next issue pertains to the removal of the statue of Dr. Y.S.Rajasekhara Reddy. The plea advanced is that the same ought to be removed as it was in violation of the directions issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the year 2013. However, the counter-affidavit filed by respondent No.6 clearly states that the said statue was installed in the year 2010 much before the directions came to be issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court. Moreover, this fact has been admitted by the petitioner himself in the averments made in the petition. The statue is stated to be installed in the premises of Tahsildar office. In the estimation of the official respondents, the same does not call for removal as it does not cause any hindrance to the free flow of traffic. 13. In any case, it is not denied by learned counsel for the petitioner that the issue pertaining encroachment of public spaces, installation of statutes, etc., is still pending before the Hon’ble Apex Court. If that be so, it would not be appropriate to continue this PIL any further. The parties to await the final disposal of the afore-mentioned Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) before the Hon’ble Apex Court. If that be so, it would not be appropriate to continue this PIL any further. The parties to await the final disposal of the afore-mentioned Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) before the Hon’ble Apex Court. In the meantime, directions issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court supra as also the decision of the Government as reflected in the Government Order dated 18.02.2013 shall be followed in letter and spirit. 14. In the light of the above observations, the Writ Petition (PIL) is closed. No costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.