Back
2019 Supreme(All) 1566
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel, Pankaj Bhatia, JJ.
Sushil Chandra Srivastava and Another – Petitioners
Versus
State of U.P. and Others – Respondents
Writ C. No. 1216 of 2019
Decided On : 20-08-2019
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Arpan Srivastava.
For the Respondent: Devi Prasad Mishra.
Headnote:
Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 226 – Petitioners is that the District administration has installed huge L.C.D. equipped with amplifiers in the residential area – Resident of Hashimpur Road, Prayagraj, which is a densely populated area. The L.C.D. starts from 4.00 A.M. till midnight regularly without any break with full sound which causes diseases and the high noise pollution is causing serious problem in her ears and heart – Challenged – Held, Supreme Court laid down directions from time to time that ultimate analysis we are of the firm view that the law relating to Noise pollution need to be strictly complied with in larger public interest – District Magistrate shall give adequate publicity in leading newspapers regarding this direction and Rules, 2000. He shall notify the name of the authority under the Rules, 2000 and his contact number –A toll free number shall be provided to the citizens to make the complaints – If a loudspeaker, public address system, DJ, a Musical Instrument, a sound amplifier or any sound producing instrument is used beyond the permissible limit of sound, a person can make a complaint on telephone number 100 to police or toll free number provided by the authorities – Under the Rules, 2000, no permission for DJ shall be granted by the authority for the reason that noise generated by DJ is unpleasant and obnoxious level – Even if they are operated at the minimum level of the sound it is beyond permissible limits under the Schedule of the Rules, 2000 – ADJ is made up of several amplifiers and joint sound emitted by them is more than thousand dB (A) – They are serious threat to human health particularly children, senior citizens and patients admitted in the hospitals – Writ petition is allowed. (Para 55,57 and 58)
Facts of the case:
The grievance of the petitioners is that the District administration has installed huge L.C.D. equipped with amplifiers in the residential area. They are resident of Hashimpur Road, Prayagraj, which is a densely populated area. The L.C.D. starts from 4.00 A.M. till midnight regularly without any break with full sound. The L.C.D. creates sound problem as well as public nuisance in the residential area. It is stated that the mother of petitioner no. 1 is aged about 85 years and she is suffering from multiple age related diseases and the high noise pollution is causing serious problem in her ears and heart. It is further stated that the son of petitioner no. 2 is studying in Class 12th and due to sound pollution he is unable to prepare for the examination. It is stated that in the area there are three hospitals/nursing homes, namely, Yashlok Hospital, Alka Hospital and Astha Clinic. A large number of patients are admitted in these hospital, some of them are suffering from heart and other serious ailments. They are also affected by high noise pollution.
Findings of the case:
Supreme Court laid down directions from time to time that ultimate analysis we are of the firm view that the law relating to Noise pollution need to be strictly complied with in larger public interest – District Magistrate shall give adequate publicity in leading newspapers regarding this direction and Rules, 2000. He shall notify the name of the authority under the Rules, 2000 and his contact number –A toll free number shall be provided to the citizens to make the complaints – If a loudspeaker, public address system, DJ, a Musical Instrument, a sound amplifier or any sound producing instrument is used beyond the permissible limit of sound, a person can make a complaint on telephone number 100 to police or toll free number provided by the authorities – Under the Rules, 2000, no permission for DJ shall be granted by the authority for the reason that noise generated by DJ is unpleasant and obnoxious level – Even if they are operated at the minimum level of the sound it is beyond permissible limits under the Schedule of the Rules, 2000 – ADJ is made up of several amplifiers and joint sound emitted by them is more than thousand dB (A) – They are serious threat to human health particularly children, senior citizens and patients admitted in the hospitals.
Result: Writ petition is allowed
JUDGMENT :
Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel, J.
1. This writ proceedings has been instituted by two petitioners who are aggrieved by indiscriminate use of Loudspeaker in a residential area regardless of time.
2. The grievance of the petitioners is that the District administration has installed huge L.C.D. equipped with amplifiers in the residential area. They are resident of Hashimpur Road, Prayagraj, which is a densely populated area. The L.C.D. starts from 4.00 A.M. till midnight regularly without any break with full sound. The L.C.D. creates sound problem as well as public nuisance in the residential area. It is stated that the mother of petitioner no. 1 is aged about 85 years and she is suffering from multiple age related diseases and the high noise pollution is causing serious problem in her ears and heart. It is further stated that the son of petitioner no. 2 is studying in Class 12th and due to sound pollution he is unable to prepare for the examination. It is stated that in the area there are three hospitals/nursing homes, namely, Yashlok Hospital, Alka Hospital and Astha Clinic. A large number of patients are admitted in these hospital, some of them are suffering from heart and other serious ailments. They are also affected by high noise pollution.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that authorities have failed to enforce the law and directions issued by the Supreme Court in a series of the decisions. It is stated that similar L.C.D. and speakers have been installed all over the city which have raised the noise pollution level to an impermissible limit under the Law. It is stated that in spite of the law laid down in the case of In Re: Noise Pollution (V), 2005 (5) SCC 733 and the statutory rules framed by the Central Government, on account of the inaction on the part of the concerned authority most of the citizens are feeling inconvenience and their health is affected by the noise pollution.
4. On 22.01.2019, time was granted to the State functionaries to file a counter affidavit and mention the fact that what action has been taken against the offenders of the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000 and various directions issued by the Supreme Court from time to time, in the last five years. The relevant part of the order reads as under:
“Sri Ajit Kumar Singh, learned Additional Advocate General appears for State respondents and Sri J.N. Maurya, learned Advocate has accepted notices on behalf of newly impleaded respondent-U.P. Pollution Control Board.
As prayed, respondents are granted time to file counter affidavit. The State respondents shall mention in their counter affidavit that in how many cases the action has been taken against the offenders of the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000 and various directions issued by the Supreme Court from time to time, in the last five years (1.1.2014 to 31.12.2018).
Put up this case on 13th February, 2019 in the additional cause list for further hearing. Learned Additional Advocate General assures the Court that in the meantime the administration shall make endeavor to comply with the directions of the Supreme Court in the matter of noise pollution.”
5. On 29.03.2019, when no response was filed by the respondents, the Court passed the following order:
“On 22.01.2019, we had directed the learned counsel for the respondents to file a counter affidavit mentioning therein that in how many cases the action has been taken against the offenders of the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000 and the various directions issued by the Supreme Court from time to time, in the last five years (1.1.2014 to 31.12.2018).
The said order has not been complied with as yet.
We direct the respondent no. 3 to furnish the said information by 05.04.2019.
Put up this case for further hearing in the additional cause list on 05.04.2019.”
6. In a companion Writ Pe
