Kolkata's Eden Gardens, India's second-largest cricket stadium, is not a 'public place'

Believe it or not, Kolkata’s famous Eden Gardens – the oldest and second-largest cricket stadium in India and the third-largest in the world – is not a ‘public place’.

The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed the Kolkata Municipal Corporation's (KMC) petition challenging the Calcutta High Court’s order quashing a demand notice claiming Rs 51.18 lakhs from Cricket Association of Bengal (CAB) on account of advertisement tax for the 1996 Cricket World Cup held at Eden Gardens.

A Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta upheld the high court’s verdict that said Eden Gardens can’t be held to be a ‘public place’ for the purposes of levying advertisement tax under the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980.

The top court upheld the high court’s verdict that said the public didn’t have an absolute or unrestricted right of access to Eden Gardens and just because the stadium could accommodate a huge number of people that would not per se make it a public place.

The KMC had issued a demand notice on March 27, 1996, claiming Rs 51,18,450 from the CAB towards advertisement tax for the inaugural ceremony and a semi-final match of the 1996 World Cup held at the Eden Gardens on February 11, 1996, and March 13, 1996, respectively.

A single judge of the Calcutta High Court had in 2015 allowed the CAB’s plea challenging the demand notice. The Division Bench upheld the single judge’s order.

On Friday, the top court dismissed the KMC’s petition challenging a June 2025 order of a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court that had said that the CAB enjoyed a lease of the Eden Gardens in Kolkata and the owner of the property was the Ministry of Defence, Government of India.

"In our opinion, as soon as conditions are imposed on members of the public for having access to a place, that place ceases to be a public place. A public place must be accessible to an indeterminate number of people without any hindrance or condition," the HC Division Bench had said.