Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Public Interest Forum vs The District Collector on 19 February, 2009

Author: Koshy

Bench: J.B.Koshy, V.Giri

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 10897 of 2008(S)


1. PUBLIC INTEREST FORUM,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DEPUTY CHIEF CONTROLLER OF

3. THE ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.B.SAHASRANAMAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR

The Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice MR.J.B.KOSHY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI

 Dated :19/02/2009

 O R D E R

J.B. Koshy,Ag.C.J. & V.Giri, J.

---------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.10897 of 2008 S

---------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of February, 2009 Judgment Koshy, Ag.C.J. This is a petition for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing respondents 1 and 2 to see that the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000 (for short 'the Rules') should be implemented in full. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has considered the matter in Noise Pollution (V) in RE, Forum, Prevention of Environmental and Sound Pollution v. Union of India ((2005) 5 SCC

733). The Hon'ble Supreme Court also noticed that the State Government has not categorized the places as industrial, commercial, residential or silent zones as contemplated under rule 3 (2) of the Rules. At the same time, it was ordered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as follows in Ext.R1 order dated 26.3.2007 in I.A.No.45 in Writ Petition (Civil) No.72 of 1998 and connected cases:

"The counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the earlier order noting was said about firecrackers. It is pointed out by the counsel for the respondent that thus Court was already issued directions in paragraph 174 in the case of Noise Pollution (V) RE, Forum, Prevention of Environmental and Sound Pollution v. Union of W.P.(C) No.10897/2008 2 India ((2005) 5 SCC 733), to the effect that the firecrackers shall not be burst between10 p.m. to 6 a.m. It may be noticed that in paragraph 168 of the above judgment, this court made the following observations:
"168. ..... Festivals and ceremonies wherein fireworks and crackers are customarily burst can be accompanied by earmarking a place and time wherein and when all the people can come together and witness or view a show of fireworks dispensing with the need of crackers being burst in residential areas, and that too, which is done without any regard to burning. Manufacturers can be encouraged to make such fireworks as would display more the colours rather than make noise."

For the festivals and ceremonies, the restriction imposed can be relaxed as large number of people gather and firecrackers may be used, subject to the directions given in the above judgment and also subject to the directions given by the authorities of Department of Explosives."

It is the case of the petitioner that by Ext.P10 classification of zones have been done in the Kerala State. In these circumstances, we direct the State to strictly enforce the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000 subject to the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Noise Pollution (V) in RE, Forum, Prevention of Environmental and Sound Pollution v. Union of India ((2005) 5 SCC W.P.(C) No.10897/2008 3

733) as well as the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ext.R1 order and other decisions.

The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions.

J.B.Koshy Acting Chief Justice V. Giri Judge vaa