Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

2.4 Per contra, the learned counsel representing the clubs and discotheques have submitted that the petitioner's fundamental right to carry business is being violated by issuing repeated notices. It was further submitted that the petitioners are running the club/discotheques after getting requisite permission from various departments. 2.5 The Union Territory's counsel has supported the Residents Welfare Association's case and submits that all steps are being taken by the U.T. Administration to enforce Noise Pollutions (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000, read with Noise Pollution Regulation framed by U.T. Administration.

other connected cases unloading of bulk material as the SCO(s) are of large size. Due to economic compulsions, these SCO(s) have converted themselves into profitable and much in demand business units such as hotels, clubs and discotheques. U.T. Administration has allowed additional covered area through partial coverage of rear courtyard, construction of basement etc. however, due to it being on a prime location and being visible along with the major road, there is constant pressure on the Administration to allow coverage of the entire back courtyard and to permit construction of box type building. However, such requests have been rejected by the Administration. Most of the clubs have covered the entire backyard by creating retraceable roofs/temporary structures. Recently, also on the recommendation of Heritage Committee, the demand of hoteliers to cover the remaining part of the courtyard through temporary/retraceable roofs has been rejected. 3.4 With regard to serving of liquor, the U.T. Administration on payment of an additional fee has permitted the clubs/discotheques to serve liquor upto 03:00 a.m. This has led to conflicts between the residents, business units and the Administration; as these clubs and discotheques/hotels play loud music; repeatedly violating the norms laid down in the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000, which categorically declare that no noise should be emitted during night hours i.e. between 10:00 p.m. to 06:00 a.m. As per the Residents Welfare Organisation, certain establishments are alleged to be repeatedly violating these norms. Union Territory, Chandigarh, in its affidavit dated 12.12.2005 filed in CWP-3739-2024, has compiled a tabulated compilation highlighting instances where a particular club/discotheques has violated norms more than three times, which is extracted as under:-

3.10 As is evident, the clubs and discotheques have filed CWP-18771-2023, CWP-21873-2023, CWP-34305-2024, CWP-34319- 2024, CWP-34311-2024, challenging the show cause notices. All these notices have been issued by the Collector, Excise. It is not the case of clubs and discotheques that the Collector has no jurisdiction to issue such notices. The clubs and discotheques have been granted an opportunity to mend their ways, i.e. stop violating regulations and submit reply. These detailed show cause notices have been issued drawing the attention of the clubs and discotheques to various violations of the Act, Rules and Excise Policy for the year 2024-2025 issued by the Union Territory, Chandigarh. The reply has been sought from the violators.

3.12 Keeping in view the aforesaid position, the writ petition is required to be disposed of by directing the Collector, Excise, to take a final decision.

3.13 Similarly, keeping in view the fact that the petitioners have pressed this writ petition only with respect to noise pollution caused during night time; remaining issues are left open to be decided in future if pressed once again by filing a fresh writ petition.

3.14 With respect to the challenge to the show cause notices, it may be noted that although the jurisdiction of a constitutional Court is plenary, however, there are certain well-settled self-imposed restrictions on the exercise of writ jurisdiction. Ordinarily, a writ petition is not entertained against a show cause notice unless it is for the enforcement of a fundamental right, a violation of principles of natural justice or if the show cause notice is wholly without jurisdiction or the vires of the act are challenged. In this batch of writ petitions, the clubs and discotheques allege that S.S.P. has withdrawn 'No Objection Certificate' without hearing them. It may be noted here that the effect of withdrawal of No Objection Certificate by S.S.P is required to be examined by the Collector, Excise, who has issued the show cause notice. It is significant to note that the S.S.P. wrote letter to the Collector, Excise, informing the factual position, which forced him to withdraw 'No Objection Certificate', thus, the S.S.P. was not required to grant opportunity of hearing to the clubs, particularly, when the clubs and discotheques have repeatedly caused noise pollution during night time i.e. 10 of 12 Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:172570-DB CWP-3739-2024 and -11- other connected cases between 10.00 p.m. to 06:00 a.m. Moreover, the internal communication sent by S.S.P. to the Collector, Excise, is informative, hence, the petitioner's submission alleging violation of principles of natural justice holds no significance and is insubstantial.