1

INTRODUCTION
India has been a land of great men and women. While it was common for the contribution
and valor of these honorable individuals to be lauded in the form of printing
commemorative stamps, coins, bestowing of awards etc; the recent trend of felicitation,
which has resurfaced in India today, is installing statues in the honor of a dignitary. It
started with the inauguration of the Statue of Unity (in the memory of Sardar Vallabh
Bhai Patel, India's 1st Deputy Prime Minister) which is currently the tallest statue in the
world, followed by the Shiv Smarak in Maharashtra and the spree of statues announced
by Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Shri Yogi Adityanath.
While a lot has been written about the huge expenditure incurred in construction of such
large-scale statues (Statue of Unity was built at a cost of approximately Rs. 3,000 crores),
very little attention has been given to the entire genesis of the decision behind erecting
these statutes. There exist both statutory law and judicial decisions, which stipulate a
detailed procedure before any statue can be installed or constructed in India.

Constitutional Status of Land:

The Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India demarcates the subject matter on
which the Parliament and the State Legislature can make laws respectively. Entry 18 of
the State List, mentions 'land' , thereby empowering only the state government to make
laws on aspects concerning the same, including constructions on the said land. This
observation has been consistently upheld by the Courts, as they have termed the state
government as the 'owner' of all public lands in
their territory.

the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India demarcates the subject matter on which
the Parliament and the State Legislature can make laws respectively. Entry 18 of the State
List, mentions 'land' , thereby empowering only the state government to make laws on
aspects concerning the same, including constructions on the said land. This observation
has been consistently upheld by the Courts, as they have termed the state government as
the
 6

'owner' of all public lands in their territory.

Installing a Statue: Who decides?
Since state governments are empowered to make laws regarding construction on lands
(which includes installation of statues) in their territory; every state has passed different
laws. The common thread however, is that a decision to install a statue requires a
mandatory approval of the District Administration followed by the state government's
approval (i.e. state cabinet). In fact, the decision of the state government in this regard, is
given top priority. To explain the procedure in detail, we can rely on the procedure for
installing of statues as followed in Andhra Pradesh. The process involves three steps:
i. Step One: A request is made to the District Administration/State government for
installing a statue by a citizen of India.
ii. Step Two: Once the request is approved by the state government, the proposal is
forwarded to Municipal Corporations/Urban Development,
Authorities/Panchayats, Electricity Authorities, Water Authorities, and other
necessary authorities, for a clearance certificate.
iii. Step Three: Once a clearance certificate is issued by the above bodies, one can
proceed with installing the statue.

Where can a Statue be installed?

The location of a statue has always been significant. For instance, the Statue of Unity
was installed near the Sardar Sarovar Dam; Lord Ram's statue is being installed on his
alleged birth site etc. Interestingly however, the governments do not have an unbridled
power to decide where to install a statue, as there exist mandatory regulations which are
to be taken into account, while deciding the location.

Statues in private lands:

As a general principle, the law grants the citizens a right to install statues in their private
property. The only caveat is that the citizen should ensure the protection of the statue
and not cause a law and order problem. This general rule does not apply in Maharashtra
by virtue of a notification issued in 2017 by the General Administration Department. As
per
 5

the notification, for installing a statue even in a private land, a no-objection certificate
from the police station guaranteeing that the statue will not create a law and order issue
or a communal tension in future, is mandatory. An additional requirement of local
residents not opposing the statue also needs to be met, even by private individuals.
However, these rules are only applicable in Maharashtra and not to other parts of India.

Statues in Public Lands:

As discussed before, 'land' is considered to be owned by the state government. With this
ownership also comes the responsibility of using it with the best interests. Courts have
consistently held that such land amounts to public property and should be used for the
welfare and betterment of the public. The above position has been seconded by the
Supreme Court of India in its order in Union of India v. State of Gujarat wherein it
mandated the state governments to not grant permissions to install/construct statues in
public roads, pavements, sideways or other public utility places. This decision has been
strongly enforced by the Courts and permission to install statues of leaders like Mahatma
Gandhi, Shri Birsa Munda etc. have been refused, when proposed on a public utility
place.

The above position has been seconded by the Supreme Court of India in its order in
Union of India v. State of Gujarat1 wherein it mandated the state governments to not
grant permissions to install/construct statues in public roads, pavements, sideways or
other public utility places. This decision has been strongly enforced by the Courts and
permission to install statues of leaders like Mahatma Gandhi, Shri Birsa Munda etc. have
been refused, when proposed on a public utility place. The justification behind is
succinctly put by Justice Agnihotri, when he said:
“The decision to honour public personalities, artists of repute, etc., must not be at the
cost of public convenience. The public roads are nothing but public property. The roads
are formed by acquiring land. The citizen is deprived of his land by the process of
acquisition. The acquisition is justified in larger public interest. The roads constructed
after such acquisition are for public purpose. It is only for the welfare and betterment of
public all such developmental activities are undertaken. The people should be allowed to
enjoy the

1
SLP No.8519 of 2006
 7

benefits of such development. The National Highways and State Highways constructed
by acquiring private property and by using public funds, can be used only for the
travelling needs of public. It cannot be converted for other collateral purposes like
erection of statues and memorials.”2
Therefore, the position of law is that a decision to install a statue rests with the state
government subject to obtaining necessary clearances. However, the said statue cannot
be installed in places of public utility namely highways, roads etc. As long as the above
is fulfilled, the Courts adopt a policy of non-interference and allow wide discretion to
the government to decide who's statue to be installed and where.

The Burning Question: Statue of Unity and the violations

The Statue of Unity is not a 'mere statue' but a project with large scale implications.
Never before has the country undertaken such a mammoth construction. That being said,
given the nature of the project, it also brought with it various environmental concerns,
namely, the project's location near a protected wildlife sanctuary, acquisition of
indigenous land, transferring of endangered species etc. Generally, the law on installing
a statue is limited to what is discussed above; however, when the statue is part of such a
large project and has large scale environmental ramifications, compliance with
environmental laws becomes a must as well. Sadly, the Statue of Unity falls flat on
such compliances.

A. Environmental Laws Violations:

Pursuant to a notification issued by the Ministry of Environment (Notification), every
major construction taking place within 10 km of protected area notified under the Wild
Life Protection Act, 1972 is considered as a Category A project, requiring a mandatory
Environment Impact Assessment Report (Report). The Statue of Unity, is 3.2 km away
from the Shoolpaneshwar Wildlife Sanctuary, which is a protected area under the Act,
thereby making an Environment Impact Assessment Report a must, before the
construction commenced. However, as per reports, no such report has been obtained and

2
P.N. Srinivasan v. State of Tamil Nadu, 2014 SCC Online Mad 159
 8

approved till date.

Second, the possibility of the Report's approval also seems bleak given the nature of the
Statue. As per the Notification factors like
(a) whether the area is used by protected species of flora and fauna?; (b) whether the
area is important for ecological reasons? etc. play a significant role, while deciding the
question of environmental clearance. The Statue of Unity answers the above questions in
affirmative as the site is home to mugger crocodiles, which are notified endangered
species and have been transferred due to the construction.

Additionally, for approval of the Report, a public consultation is mandatory so as to

consider objections to the said construction. However, no such consultation was called in
by the government, as per media reports.

B. Violation of Judicial Precedents:

The Statue of Unity, apart from violating the statutory law, also goes against the
decisions of the Courts. The Courts have time and again cautioned the government
against constructions that negatively affect ecological balance and even warned judicial
interference if the above is not followed.
In fact, previously the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Jagdev Singh v.
State of Haryana, has struck down a government project of installing the statue of a
leader, when the same required the diversion of water bodies. The Court here opined that
although 'we respect the sentiments of the village to honour a martyr…we direct the
authorities to demarcate alternative land for the memorial.'
Similarly, for the Statue of Unity, water bodies are being diverted and flora and fauna is
being removed. In this apparent attempt to honour a leader, the ecology is suffering. The
decision of the High Court although not binding on the state of Gujarat, does carry a
persuasive value and a call to preserve the environment. While the Courts have always
considered the government authorities as the trustee of the environment, it seems that
this feeling is not respected.
 9

Concluding Remarks:
As of today, the Uttar Pradesh government has planned to install several other statues
throughout the state, which shall carry a heavy burden on the exchequer. The rise of
statue politics in India, reminds me of the words Justice Jagdeesan in K Kannadasan
v. District Collector3, wherein he cautioned against using statues as a medium to respect
our heroes. The Judge opined, 'the political leaders as well as freedom fighters can be
remembered in a more respectable manner by having a memorial by way of community
hall or a library in their name which may not create any problem for the public and at the
same time it will be more useful and beneficial for them.'
The devil certainly lies in the details; however despite elaborate procedure existing in
place, the installation of statutes has been made to seem far more innocuous and
common place, than it ought to be. One can therefore only hope for a day in the near
future, when an announcement is based on rational reasoning, corroborating the need for
the same instead of it being used only as a tool for political appeasement.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS

 A.M.Setlavad, Transfer of Property, (Bombay, N.M.Tripathi pvt. Ltd., 1973)

 Solil Paul, Mulla- Transfer of Property, (New Delhi, Butterwoth’s, 2000)

3
Writ Petition No.3182 of 2015
 1
0
 B.B.Mitra, Transfer of Property, (Calcutta, Kamal Law House, Calcutta, 1988)

 H.S.Gour, Law of Transfer of Property, vol 2, 9th edition, (New Delhi, Law

Publishers Pvt. Ltd., 1990)