The Supreme Court on Monday pulled up the Tamil Nadu government for not giving a "meaningful response" to its March 8 order to take steps to stop the defacement of natural environment like mountains, hills and hillocks by covering them in multi-coloured slogans of parties and their leaders should stop immediately.

A Bench led by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi Tamil Nadu government has not imbibed the "proper spirit" of its order meant to protect natural resources from disfigurement by political parties.

Not impressed by the State's submission that a committee has been appointed, the apex court said the "State has failed to respond in a meaningful manner".

The court once again stressed that the State should ensure that no disfigurement of any public place should happen.

The order came on the basis of a special leave petition filed by A Bench led by a group, In Defence of Environment and Animals, represented by advocate Elephant G. Rajendran, which sought a judicial order to disqualify electoral candidates who do not remove their political advertisements, flags, posts, etc, with “immediate effect” from rock faces, mountains, hills, etc.

The petition has along with the State of Tamil Nadu also arraigned the Union of India, Chief Election Commissioner of India and general secretaries of AIADMK and DMK and political parties like BSP, BJP, CPI, CPI(M), DMDK, INC, NCP, among other pollution control authorities and senior officials.

The petition has been filed challenging a March 3, 2017 decision of the Madras High Court which though agreed with the cause of the petitioner went on to observe that a solution cannot be found overnight due to paucity of “official staff and machinery”. The petition said the high court observed that it would not be possible for the State to take steps immediately. The cleansing would take some reasonable time.

The petition said the paintings and billboards dot the landscape despite a specific direction from the apex court in the Godavarman Thirumulpad case, reported in 2002, that natural resources should not be disturbed or defaced by ads, hoardings, graffiti, etc.

Mr. Rajendran said the defacement was not restrained to one particular place, but could be seen on bridges, central medians of roads, highways, hills, rocks, etc. “Ninety percent of the ads are done by political parties. Authority has not taken any action and not come forward to prevent it,” the petition said.

The lawyer mentions how he had once journeyed from Madurai to Chennai via Trichy and Chengalpet and witnessed first-hand the defacement of the natural landscape with ads, graffiti, religious slogans, etc.

He said the authorities should to travel to the places pointed out by him and see for themselves. He said neither did the political parties make any appearance in the high court nor had they bothered to file a counter. The high court could have at least issued directions to the respective District Collectors to act or even prevent the disfigurement of the natural landscape