Encroachments by religious idols on public roads must be removed to ensure unobstructed traffic flow.

The petitioner filed a Writ Petition seeking a Mandamus to compel the Erode City Municipal Corporation (Respondents 2 and 3) to remove an encroachment on a public road and tree at Thendral Nagar, Erode

The petitioner alleged that the 5th respondent installed a religious statue on a portion of the public road

The petitioner contended that such installations are often the first step in a modus operandi to eventually construct permanent buildings, which obstructs traffic and becomes difficult for authorities to remove at a later stage

A formal representation regarding this was submitted by the petitioner on 03.02.2026

1. Whether a Writ of Mandamus should be issued to direct the municipal authorities to remove the religious idol and associated encroachment from the public road

2. Whether the installation of religious statues on public roads is permissible in view of the right of road users to the free flow of traffic

The Court exercised its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus

It applied the principle that public roads are intended for the benefit of road users and must be kept free of obstacles to ensure the free flow of traffic

The Court further relied on the procedural requirements established under relevant municipal Statutes and Rules in force, which mandate that encroachment removal must be preceded by a field survey and the issuance of notice to the affected parties to satisfy the principles of natural justice

The Court analyzed the petitioner’s evidence, noting that photographs showed religious idols installed beneath a tree on what appeared to be public land

The Court validated the petitioner’s concern that encroachments in the form of religious idols often expand into permanent illegal structures, concluding that such obstructions must be addressed at the "initial stage" to prevent long-term public inconvenience

the Court determined that it could not summarily order removal without factual verification. Consequently, it linked the legal requirement for a "field inspection and survey" to the administrative duty of the respondents to identify the exact nature of the encroachment

The Court emphasized that while the law mandates the removal of obstructions from public paths, it equally requires the authorities to follow due process by providing the 5th respondent an opportunity to be heard before any coercive action is taken

The Court held that if encroachments are confirmed, the authorities must follow statutory procedures, including issuing notice and providing an opportunity for the 5th respondent or other encroachers to respond

The Court ordered that this exercise be completed within twelve weeks from the date of receipt of the order

No costs were awarded