SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1985 Supreme(Cal) 87

BHAGABATI PRASAD BANERJEE
RABIN MUKHERJEE – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ASHOK GANGULY, MUKUL PRAKASH BANERJI, RUMA CHAUDHARY

BHAGAWATI PRASAD BANERJEE, J.


( 1 ) THIS writ application was moved by the petitioners for protection of their own rights and also in public interest being aggrieved by the nuisance and noise pollution which are being created in the impunity by the transport operators by indiscriminate installation and use of electric and artificially generated air horns which cause unduly rash, shrill, loud and alarming noise. In the writ petition, the petitioners prayed for a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Respondents to enforce the provisions of R. 114 of the Bengal Motor Vehicles Rules, 1940 and to enforce the restrictions against the use of such electric and other loud and shrill horns including air horns by operators of the transport vehicles. The case of the petitioners is that State of West Bengal is a thickly populated area and the density of population is one of the highest in India. It was further alleged that the prevailing noise level in this State particularly in the Calcutta Metropolitan Area is far in excess of the permissible limit and it is no longer in dispute that such excessive noise level poses positive danger to the residents of the respective locality. It also










Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top