Telangana High Court
Valliyur Hariharan Ramakrishnan And 7 ... vs The State Of Telangana And 5 Others on 29 December, 2021
Author: Satish Chandra Sharma
Bench: Satish Chandra Sharma, N.Tukaramji
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI
WRIT PETITION No.9652 of 2021
ORDER:(Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma) The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners, who are the residents of SMR Vinay City, a residential housing complex comprising of approximately 500 plots situated at Bollaram Road, Sri Rangapuram Colony, Rangapuram, Miyapur, Telangana.
The grievance of the petitioners is that one M/s. Candeur Developers and Builders/respondent No.6 in the present writ petition are constructing a high rise residential apartment and because of the construction activities, they are creating sound pollution. The petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs under the relief clause.
"For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, and those that may be urged at the time of hearing, it is therefore, most respectfully, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to:
a) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction directing the Respondent Nos.2 to No.5 to ensure that Respondent No.6 shall strictly comply with the provisions of the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules 2000 r/w the Environment Protection Act, 1986 while undertaking the construction of "Candeur 40" at Bollaram Road, Sri Rangapuram Colony, Rangapuram, Miyapur, Telangana 500049.
b) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction directing the Respondent Nos2 to No.5 to ensure that Respondent No.6 shall install appropriate noise barriers (Acoustic sheds or partitions) of sufficient height be erected on the sides of the construction side to contain and reduce the impact of noise arising out of various construction activities being under taken by Candeur and also ensure that Candeur shall strictly adhere to the 2 ambient air quality standards in respect of noise prescribed under the Noise rules even during day time.
c) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction directing the Respondent Nos.2 to No.5 to ensure that Respondent No.6 shall undertake machine activities that generate a lot of noise only between 10.00 A.M to 04.00 P.M during the day time subject to the provisions of and compliance with Noise rules.
d) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction directing the Respondent Nos.2 to No.5 to ensure that Respondent No.6 shall install appropriate sound absorbing materials for the construction equipment to contain the sound levels.
e) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ order or direction directing the Respondent Nos.2 to No.5 to ensure that Respondent No.6 shall not undertake any construction activity of any sort for at least one day on every week till the construction activities of Candeur 40 is completed.
f) Issue such other appropriate writ or direction that may be deemed to be just and equitable in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice." A detailed and exhaustive reply has been filed in the matter and the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.6 in open Court has informed this Court that they have paid Rs.25 lakhs to the Resident Welfare Association and a MOU has also been executed between the parties on 20.03.2021. It is also stated that respondent No.6 is taking all possible steps to ensure that no sound pollution takes place and they have confined their construction activity only during the day time.
This Court by an order dated 25.10.2021 has directed the Pollution Control Board to carryout surprise check and to file a report and accordingly, report dated 22.12.2021 has been filed in the matter and the same is reproduced as under:
"It is to submit that a W.P.No.9652 of 2021 is filed by Valliyur Hariharan Ramakrishnan & others, R/o. SMT Vinay City, Miyapur, Rangareddy District on noise pollution caused due to the construction of "Candeur 40" at Miyapur, Rangareddy District.3
The Hon'ble High Court vide order datged 25.10.2021 directed the Pollution Control Board shall carry out periodical surprise checks during day time as well as during night time in respect of the site in question, keeping in view the schedule, and shall file a report after every four weeks before this Court.
In this regard, the following is submitted:
1. The Board officials have inspected the Project site on 27.11.2021 and 03.12.2021. During the inspection, the petitioner and representative of Candeur 40 were present.
2. During inspection on 03.12.2021, noise monitoring was carried out in day time during the construction activity at the following locations:
Sl. Monitoring Status of Lmin Lmax Leq Ambient noise No. location windows/curtains during during during standards for night time night night residential area (open/closed) dB(A) time time as per dB(A) dB(A) schedule-III (Rules-3) of E(P) Act, 1986.
Night Time
dB(A) Leq
1 Petitioner's Flat Open 52.7 67.9 59.4
No.1005 (10th
Floor), Block 2A
2 Flat No.105 (1st Open 53.2 62.8 59.2
Floor), Block 1,
Deepankar
House 55
Open 61.1 75.2 69.8
Windows covered 44.3 56.6 50
3 Flat No.905 (9th by sound
Floor), Block 1 resistant curtains
Debkumar House Closed 44.8 54.3 51.4
Inference: The above analysis reports indicate the following:
Noise levels were exceeding the standards during construction activity when doors and windows were kept open.
Noise levels were within the standards during construction activity when doors and windows were kept closed. Noise levels were within the standards during construction activity at the location where the windows were covered by sound resistant curtains.
3. During inspection on 20.12.2021, noise monitoring was carried out at the following locations in the night time and there was no construction activity:
Sl. Monitoring Status of Lmin Lmax Leq Ambient noise No. location curtains/ doors/ during during during standards for windows night time night night residential area dB(A) time time as per (open/closed) dB(A) dB(A) schedule-III (Rules-2) of E(P) Act, 1986.
4 Night Time dB(A) Leq 1 Petitioner's Flat Open 42.9 53.9 48.2 No.1005 (10th Floor), Block 2A 2 Flat No.105 (1st Open 41.1 51.2 47 Floor), Block 1, Deepankar House Open 50.8 59.7 51.2 45 Windows 35.7 48.5 38.8 3 Flat No.905 (9th covered by Floor), Block 1 sound resistant Debkumar House curtains Closed 38.8 48.1 41.9
Inference: The above analysis reports indicate the following:
Noise monitoring was carried out during the night tme (i.e., 10 pm to 11 pm). During the monitoring there was no construction activity. However, vehicular movement was observed on the road at a distance of 200 mtrs from the monitoring location.
Noise levels were exceeding the standards when considered for night time ambient noise standards for residential area (i.e., 45 dB(A) Leq), when doors and windows were kept open. The same may be due to vehicular movement. Noise levels were within the limits when doors and windows were kept closed/windows covered by sound resistant curtains.
The noise monitoring reports indicates that the noise levels were exceeding the standards whenever the windows/doors are kept open during the construction activity. However, the noise levels were within the standards, whenever the windows/doors are kept closed or covered by sound resistant curtains. The project developer has provided sound resistant curtains to the flats facing the construction activity. The petitioner stated that it is not possible to cover the windows all the time with sound resistant curtains as it would effects ventilation and light. Date: 22.12.2021 Place: Hyderabad Sd/-
ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER T.S. Pollution Control Board, Regional Office-I, R.R. District."
In the light of the aforesaid report, this Court is of the opinion that since respondent No.6 has taken all possible steps to ensure that the noise level does not exceed the prescribed standards and even has gone to the extent in providing sound resistant curtains to some of the flats, which are facing the construction side, no further 5 orders are required to be passed in the present writ petition and the same is disposed of accordingly.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
__________________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ ______________________________ N. TUKARAMJI, J 29.12.2021 ES