Bombay High Court
MUMBAI HOARDING OWNERS ASSOCIATION AND ANR.versusMUNICIPALCORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI AND 2 ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The 2014 circular is superseded by the Advertisement Guidelines 2025, making the writ petition challenging it infructuous and leading to its disposal.
Summary
The Mumbai Hoarding Owners Association challenged a Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai circular dated 9 May 2014 that regulated hoarding advertisements. The corporation, through an affidavit, stated that all earlier circulars were superseded by the Advertisement Guidelines 2025, rendering the 2014 circular automatically cancelled, though formal cancellation was stayed due to pending litigation. The High Court examined these statements and concluded that the 2014 circular no longer had any legal effect. Consequently, the petition seeking to invalidate the circular was deemed infructuous. Both the writ petition and the related interim application were therefore disposed of by the Court.
Issues considered
- Whether the Circular dated 9 May 2014 remains legally enforceable after the issuance of the Advertisement Guidelines 2025 which purportedly supersede earlier circulars.
- Whether a writ petition challenging a superseded circular is maintainable.
- Whether the interim application remains viable after the main petition is rendered infructuous.
Subjects
- advertisement hoarding
- municipal corporation
- circular supersession
- writ petition
- administrative law
- interim application
- infructuous petition
Judgment
NISHA Digitally signed by NISHA
SANDEEP CHITNIS
SANDEEP Date: 2026.08.27
CHITNIS 14:40:17 +0530
906-wp.2869.2014w.ia.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.2869 OF 2014
Mumbai Hoarding Owners Association and Anr. ...Petitioners
Versus
Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (LODGING) NO.23241 OF 2026
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.2869 OF 2014
M/s. Creation ...Applicant
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN:-
Mumbai Hoarding Owners Association and Anr. ...Petitioners
Versus
Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Ors. ...Respondents
Ms. Aakanksha Saxena with Ms. Smruti Ranade and Mr. Ayan Shah i/b
Negandhi Shah and Himayatullah for the Petitioners.
Dr. Dhruti Kapadia with Mr. Shailendra Sardar i/b Ms. Komal Punjabi
for the M.C.G.M.
Mr. Anil Shevale, Deputy Superintendent of License, is present.
Mr. Uttam Rane for the Applicant in IAL/23241/2026.
CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE &
ASHISH S. CHAVAN, JJ.
DATE : 25th AUGUST 2026
N. S. Chitnis 1/4
906-wp.2869.2014w.ia.doc
P.C. :
1. The writ petition raising a challenge to the Circular dated
9th May 2014 issued by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai
(M.C.G.M.) being illegal, unconstitutional, bad in law, void ab-initio
and not binding on the petitioners deserves a disposal in the wake of
the clear statement being made before us by the Deputy Municipal
Commissioner (Special) designated by the BMC, in his additional
affidavit affirmed on 21st August 2026.
We have specifically taken note of the specific statements
contained in paragraphs 10 and 11 of the affidavit, which read thus:-
“10. I say and submit that all Circulars / Guidelines
issued prior to the Advertisement Guidelines,
2025 is treated as superseded. Circular dated
09.05.2014 would have been automatically
cancelled/ceased to be in force after the
issuance of the new guidelines. Furthermore
due to this issue being subjudice before the
Hon'ble High Court, it has not been possible
to take a decision regarding cancellation of
said Circular;
11. I further say and submit that this Respondent
herein been Authority of Mumbai Municipal
Corporation has taken decision to cancel the
Circular No. SL/01/LAD, dt. 09.05.2014 of
advertisement hoardings from the terrace of
N. S. Chitnis 2/4
906-wp.2869.2014w.ia.doc
building which completes 30 years of life.
However except sub section (b) of part 4.2
(ii) mentioned in Policy Guidelines for display
of outdoor advertisements 2025 about
Hoarding of Terraces will be as it is.”
2. Reading of the aforesaid statements make it evidently clear
that in the wake of the Advertisement Guidelines, 2025, the
Corporation has adopted a stand that all existing Circulars/Guidelines
stood superseded and the Circular dated 9 th May 2014, which is
impugned in the present petition, would also automatically being
cancelled, but for the pendency of the proceedings.
We clarify that if it is the intention of the Corporation to
give effect to its Advertisement Guidelines 2025, and all the earlier
Circulars/Guidelines stand superseded, we do not intend to stand in its
way of giving effect to this understanding.
Accepting the said statement that the Circular of 9 th May
2014, no longer exists in the view of the Advertisement Guidelines
2025, in our view the writ petition has been rendered infructuous, as
it raises a challenge to the Circular dated 9 th May 2014. The Writ
Petition is accordingly disposed of.
N. S. Chitnis 3/4
906-wp.2869.2014w.ia.doc
In view of the disposal of the writ petition, nothing
survives for consideration in Interim Application being Interim
Application (Lodging) No.23241 of 2026. The same is also disposed
of accordingly.
ASHISH S. CHAVAN, J. BHARATI DANGRE, J.
N. S. Chitnis 4/4
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.