View of Karnataka High Court. | Photo credit: File photo
The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday ordered the issuance of notices to the state government and the Greater Bangalore Authority (GBA) on a PIL complaining about the “illegal” use of self-advertisement/signage electronic/digital boards to display commercial advertisements and the recent rules providing one time opportunity (OTO) to convert such illegal hoardings.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice CM Poonach passed the order on a petition filed by 84-year-old K. Laxmana, a former central government official and social worker.
Three month window
The petitioner specifically challenged Rule 8(7)(vii) of the Greater Bengaluru Area (Advertising) Rules, 2025 and the subsequent Government Order dated February 4, 2026, which provides a period of three months – ending in April 2026 – to convert existing advertising spaces into commercial advertising spaces after paying the prescribed advertising space.
The petition claims that most of these electronic boards on private land were erected during the total ban on commercial boards in 2018 following the Supreme Court’s intervention. Later, the erstwhile Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) council unanimously passed a resolution banning commercial hoarding on private land and public rights-of-way to preserve the city’s aesthetics and safety, leading to the BBMP bidding farewell to outdoor signage and public messaging in 2018, the petitioner said.
Gross violation
Despite this ban, the GBA allegedly continued to grant permission for electronic/digital hoarding of its own advertisement, meant only to identify and promote the business on site and not to display any other promotional materials, in apparent violation of Section 158 of the BBMP Act, 2020, which mandates written permission from the Chief Commissioner.
The petitioner argues that the OTO scheme is “manifestly arbitrary and unconstitutional” because it rewards infringers by legitimizing illegal hoarding that is currently used for commercial purposes, contrary to their original permission for self-advertisement only. It also circumvents the competitive bidding process mandated for commercial ads under the new regulations and creates an unfair advantage for those who have broken the law, the petition claims.
Accident risks
The petitioner also alleged that the bright, frequently changing LEDs/LCDs on these electronic/digital boards distract motorists and pedestrians and pose a risk of an accident. The petitioner, who characterizes these digital piles as “visual pollution”, said that this is a violation of the right to the environment guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution.
Published – 11 March 2026 22:44 IST
