1. Notification of Draft Rules under Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 to address noise pollution. (Para 1 )
Back
Next 
1999 Supreme(SC) 1165
Supreme Court Of India
NOISE POLLUTION (I)
Versus
UNION OF INDIA
Decided on October 7, 1999
Urgent action is required to address noise pollution, and additional suggestions can be considered even after the expiry of the objection period.
Headnote:
Notification - Environment Protection Act, 1986 - The court discussed the Ministry of Environment and Forests' notification proposing Draft Rules to tackle noise pollution and emphasized the importance of addressing the issue promptly.
Fact of the Case:
The Ministry of Environment and Forests issued a notification proposing Draft Rules to address noise pollution, and the period for inviting objections to the Draft Rules had expired.
Finding of the Court:
The court emphasized the urgency of addressing noise pollution and allowed for fresh suggestions to be made within the next two weeks, ensuring that they would be taken into consideration despite the expiry of the objection period.
Issues: Addressing noise pollution under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986
Ratio Decidendi: The court stressed the need for expeditiously framing Rules to deal with increasing noise pollution and allowed for additional suggestions to be considered, despite the expiry of the objection period.
Final Decision: The matter was adjourned by eight weeks to allow for the consideration of additional suggestions to address noise pollution.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Submission that suggestions from petitioners and other bodies will be considered during the finalization of Draft Rules. (Para 1 )
3. Need for expeditious framing of rules to address increasing noise pollution. (Para 3 )
4. Extension of the period for submitting suggestions on draft rules to ensure comprehensive consideration of stakeholder inputs. (Para 2 )
5. Fresh suggestions permitted within two weeks and matter adjourned for eight weeks. (Para 2 , 4 )
6. Can the period for submitting objections to draft rules be extended after the prescribed deadline has expired?
Yes, the court may allow fresh suggestions beyond the expired period provided the government assures that such suggestions will be taken into consideration during the finalization of the rules. (Para 2 )
Judgment
( 1 ) MR Altaf Ahmed, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the Union of India submits that the Ministry of Environment and Forests has issued a notification on 28-6-1999 proposing certain Draft Rules under the environment (Protection) Act, 1986, to tackle the increasing noise pollution from various sources which has deleterious effect on human health and affects the physical and psychological well-being of the people. The learned additional Solicitor General further submits that various suggestions made by the petitioners as also any other suggestion which the learned amicus curiae or the counsel for the Central Pollution Control Board may now make shall be taken note of while finalising the Rules.
( 2 ) SINCE the period of sixty days for inviting objections to the Draft Rules has expired, fresh suggestions, if any, be made within the next two weeks. We are assured by the learned Additional Solicitor General that if the suggestions are made within the period of two weeks, the same shall be taken into consideration, notwithstanding the expiry of the period of sixty days.
( 3 ) WE do hope effective steps to frame Rules to deal with increasing noise pollution shall be taken expeditiously.
( 4 ) WE adjourn the matter by eight weeks.
