Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: noise pollution Page 1 of about 4,470 results (0.171 seconds)

Jul 18 2005 (SC)

In Re: Noise Pollution - Implementation of the Laws for Restricting Us ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2005SC3136; 2005(3)AWC2685(SC); 2005(5)BomCR553; 121(2005)DLT547(SC); [2005(4)JCR4(SC)]; JT2005(6)SC210; (2005)5SCC733

..... the problems and the laws on the subject. residents welfare associations (raws), service clubs (such as rotary international and lions international) and societies engaged in preventing noise pollution as part of their projects need to be encouraged and actively involved by the local administration. festival and ceremonies wherein the fireworks and crackers are customarily burst can ..... is still lagging behind in enacting adequate and scientific legislations. we need to have one simple but specific and detailed legislation dealing with several aspects referable to noise pollution and providing measures of control therefore. 171. there is an equal need of developing mechanism and infrastructure for enforcement of the prevalent laws. those who are ..... authorities responsible for implementing the laws are not yet fully identified. those which have been designated, do not seem to be specialised in the task of regulating noise pollution. there is dearth of necessary personnel technically qualified to act effectively. what is needed is a combination of technically qualified and administratively competent personnel with the requisite ..... and, therefore, rules prescribing reasonable restrictions including the rules for the use of loudspeakers and voice amplifiers framed under the madras town nuisances act, 1889 and also the noise pollution (regulation and control) rules, 2000 are required to be enforced.'121. in charan lal sahu v. union of india : air1990sc1480 the supreme court reiterated the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 05 2008 (SC)

Farhd K. Wadia Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2009AIRSCW1294; 2009(1)AWC856(SC); 2009(4)BomCR448; [2009(1)JCR193(SC)]; 2009(1)SCALE293; (2009)2SCC442; 2009(3)LHSC1849

..... `defined and discussed in the rules'. the parties thereto and particularly the state of maharashtra understood the said order in that light.18. interference by the court in respect of noise pollution is premised on the basis that a citizen has certain rights being `necessity of silence', `necessity of sleep', `process during sleep' and `rest', which are biological necessities and ..... , community halls and banquet halls.(3) notwithstanding anything contained in sub- rule (2), the state government may, subject to such terms and conditions as are necessary to reduce noise pollution, permit use of loudspeakers or public address systems during night hours (between 10.00 p.m. to 12.00 midnight) on or during any cultural or religious festive occasion of ..... therein had also not been filed in the second public interest litigation.13. whereas the public interest litigation was filed by dr. yeshwant trimbak oke & ors. contending that noise pollution created by reason of use of loudspeakers be curbed in the areas which have been and should be declared as silence zone, the purported public interest litigation was filed by ..... and final disposal of this petition, i.e., writ petition no. 2053 of 2003, no loudspeaker permission be granted in respect of 'silence zone' as defined and discussed in the noise pollution (regulation & control) rules, 2000, as amended from time to time.(2) pending hearing and final disposal of the petition, the respondents are directed to issue loudspeaker permission verifying .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 28 2005 (SC)

Forum, Prevention of Envn. and Sound Pollution Vs. Union of India (Uoi ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2006SC348; 2006(1)AWC5(SC); 2005(6)BomCR729; [2006(1)JCR90(SC)]; JT2005(9)SC319; 2005(4)KLT824(SC); (2006)1MLJ49(SC); RLW2005(4)SC3071; 2005(9)SCALE69

..... (supra) that we are not concerned with any religion or religious practices; we are concerned only with the fundamental right of the citizens and the people to protect themselves against noise pollution and forced audiences. we are inclined to quote the following passage from times of india (the speaking tree) dated 7.10.2005:'those who favour the use of loudspeakers plead ..... number of days on which the power to grant exemption would be available or increasing the permissible hours of relaxation and that would again defeat the very object of preventing noise pollution. the learned solicitor general responded by submitting that the impugned sub-rule has very limited operation which is reasonable and may not be interfered with by the court, subject ..... of a limited duration not exceeding fifteen days in all during a calendar year.' sub-rule (3) has been inserted in the present form by the noise pollution (regulation and control) (amendment) rules, 2002 with effect from 11th october, 2002. the constitutional validity of sub-rule (3) was put in issue by the appellant herein by ..... conference rooms, community halls and banquet halls.(3) notwithstanding anything contained in sub- rule (2), the state government may, subject to such terms and conditions as are necessary to reduce noise pollution, permit use of loud speakers or public address systems during night hours (between 10.00 p.m. to 12.00 midnight) on or during any cultural or religious festive occasion .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 23 2001 (HC)

Free Legal Aid Cell Shri Sugan Chand Aggarwal Alias Bhagat Ji Vs. Govt ...

Court : Delhi

Reported in : AIR2001Delhi455; 93(2001)DLT28; 2001(60)DRJ297

..... periodic display in press and electronic media should be made about the desirability of young children not using dangerous firecrackers and safe use thereof.(xiii) rule 5(2) of the noise pollution rules restricts the use of loudspeakers, public address system at night, i.e., between 10.00 p.m. to 6.00 a.m., except in closed premises, like ..... as it is rightly said that god is not deaf. flights of aero planes should be also planned to curb noise. noise code regulating all aspects of noise pollution may be enacted. as the problem of noise pollution has already crossed the danger point and noise like a smog is threatening as a slow agent of death, immediate measures are needed to be taken in ..... u.s.a. by dr. nowall jones professor of psychology at the university of california, proved that there were more birth defects among the babies whose mothers lived in noise polluted areas near the international airports compared to those who lived in quieter places. similar results were obtained in a different study near london's heathrow airport. neonatal development is ..... and university levels.(vi) the press and media should play a constructive role to highlight disastrous effects of noise pollution and its remedy.(vii) the district administration and the concerned pollution control boards should work out the modalities to prevent catastrophic effect of noise pollution by ensuring strict compliance with the statutory provisions, scanty though they are.(viii) both central government and state .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 15 2001 (HC)

P. Ramakrishna Sastry Vs. Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada Urban Pol ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2001(4)ALT326

..... of the said act, in case of non-compliance of the provisions of rule 114(d) of the said rules so that this type of noise pollution is eradicated at any early date from the state of west bengal.18. yet again in nayan bchari dass v. state of orissa (original jurisdiction ..... , lorries etc.2. the fact that there exists noise pollution in the city of vijayawada is not in dispute. an affidavit, affirmed by sri. b. sreenivas, sub-inspector of police on behalfof respondents 1, ..... of a letter dated 16-9-2000 written by a practising advocate in vijayawada city addressed to the honourable chief justice of this court regarding the noise pollution created in the city of vijayawada by reason of the use of air horns at their pitch by a.p. state road transport corporation buses ..... them. it also stands admitted that despite taken action in this regard, the ambient air quality standards in respect of noise fixed by the central pollution control board in terms of the noise pollution (regulation and control) rules, 2000 as also the directives issued by the commissioner of police had not produced the desired ..... 4 and 10 was filed contending that organised special camps were held to curb noise pollution with the assistance of a.p. pollution control board and in the month of january, 2001, 1241 cases have been booked. all kinds of gas horns/pneumatic horns and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 2000 (SC)

Church of God (Full Gospel) in India Vs. K.K.R. Majestic Colony Welfar ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2000SC2773; 2000(2)ALD(Cri)626; 2000(5)ALT22(SC); 2001(49)BLJR806; 2000CriLJ4022; JT2000(9)SC575; 2000(3)KLT651(SC); 2000(6)SCALE163; (2000)7SCC282; [2000]Supp3SCR15; 20

..... musical instruments and, therefore, rules prescribing reasonable restrictions including the rules for the use of loudspeakers and voice amplifiers framed under (the madras town nuisance act. 1889 and also the noise pollution (regulation and control) rules, 2000 arc required to be enforced. we would mention that even though the rules are unambiguous, there is lack of awareness among the citizens as ..... bench of the same high court on the basis of the madras city police act, 1888 and the madras towns nuisance act, 1889. it is also in conformity with the noise pollution (regulation and control) rules, 2000 framed by the central government under the provisions of the environment (protection) act, 1986 read with rule 5 of the environment (protection) rules, 1986. ..... religious minority institution from pursuing its religious activities and the court cannot issue any direction to prevent the church from practicing its religious beliefs. it was also submitted that the noise pollution was due to playing of vehicles and not due to use of loudspeakers etc.5. the learned judge referred to the decision of the high court in appa rao, ..... this appeal are that in a country having multiple religions and numerous communities or sects, whether a particular community or sect of that community can claim right to add to noise pollution on the ground of religion? whether beating of drums or reciting of prayers by use of microphones and loudspeakers so as to disturb the peace or tranquillity of neighbourhood .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 22 2003 (HC)

Neelakandan Namboodiri Vs. State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Reported in : 2004CriLJ1134; 2004(1)KLT335

..... necessary orders shall be issued by the government in this regard.31. the police and transport authorities shall ensure that effective and appropriate action is taken forthwith to abate noise pollution that is being caused by use of air horns. no vehicle shall be permitted to use air horns. strict compliance shall be ensured and necessary instructions shall be issued ..... (a). rule 4 mandates that it is the responsibility of the authority including police or any other officers authorised by the state government for the purpose, to enforce noise pollution control measures. it is the duty of the state government and the machinery thereunder to maintain ambient air quality standards in different areas. the rules admit of no ..... air quality standards specified under the rules. sub-rule (4) also obligates all development authorities, local bodies etc. to consider all aspects of noise pollution as a parameter of quality of life to avoid noise menace.18. rule 4 provides that the nose levels in any area/zone shall not exceed the ambient air quality standards in respect of ..... the stockholm conference in 1972, detailed plans were chalked out to tackle the problems of water pollution, air pollution and noise pollution which were identified as the three most important branches of environmental pollution. thus 'the water (prevention and control of pollution) act, 1974', 'the air (prevention and control of pollution) act, 1981' and 'the environment (protection) act, 1986' were enacted by the central .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 01 2000 (HC)

Jan Hitai Vs. State of U.P. and Others

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : 2000(4)AWC3083

..... the marriage ceremonies, religious functions and meetings as well as for the purpose of advertisement, the loudspeakers are fitted with a high beams in congested localities and halls are causing noise pollution as a result of which the ambient air quality is seriously affected but the authorities fail to check that menace, it is the duty of the state to protect the ..... hearing the counsel of the parties, we allow this writ petition by issuing a direction to the state government to categorize theareas as laid down in the schedule to the noise pollution (regulation and control) rules, 2000, in all cities with a population of ten lac and above to start with, enforce therein the ambient air quality standards in respect of ..... the offices also are adversely affected.4. despite its dangers, noise pollution never receives the attention that air or water pollution docs. one reason is that an overworked police force cannot keep a check on the rapidly growing traffic population. though the central motor vehicles rules of ..... of several persons often are found to be fitted with sirens, which is against the rules. this is also one of the reasons for noise pollution. one to the use of the loudspeakers and other public systems, the noise pollution has increased which is hazardous to the health of the people particularly people belonging to tender age. thestudies of the students, the work in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 12 2007 (SC)

Sheikh Ikram Sheikh Israil and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2007(3)ALLMR(SC)873; 2007(5)SCALE584; (2007)4SCC217; 2007(1)LC571(SC)

..... and some local residents. the writ petition was disposed of granting liberty to the parties to place the materials in support of their respective stands before the concerned authorities. the noise pollution (regulation and control) rules, 2000 (in short the 'rules') have been framed in exercise of powers conferred by clause (ii) of sub-section (2) of section 3, sub-section ( ..... high and amounted to nuisance.in view of the above position, the writ petition was dismissed.3. in support of the appeal learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the noise pollution level was low and there was marginal variation and, therefore, the notice issued by the superintendent is without any basis. learned counsel for the state of maharashtra, the board ..... of the school in the vicinity of their houses and there cannot be any complaint of noise pollution against them. on that basis the writ petition was filed impugning order of the superintendent of police. reply affidavit was filed by the said superintendent of police as respondent no ..... the date of receipt of the order, failing which suitable legal action would be taken. the reasons disclosed in the notice were that in the process of preparing brass utensils, noise pollution is created which affects the neighbours, teachers and students around and nearby the houses of the appellants. the appellants took the stand that they were in business before the opening .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 06 2005 (HC)

Malayath Vs. State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Reported in : III(2005)ACC617; 2005(3)KLT190

..... motor vehicles act as well as the provisions of the environment (protection) act, 1986 and the noise pollution (regulation and control) rules, 2000. we do not propose to reiterate those findings with which we fully concur. we may all the same point out in rule 119 of central ..... .2. learned single judge repelled those contentions and gave a positive direction to the police and transport authorities to ensure that effective and appropriate action is taken forthwith to abate noise pollution. judgment is reported in neelakandan namboodiri v. state of kerala, 2004 (1) klt 335 = ilr 2004 (1) ker. 634. learned judge has elaborately considered the various provisions of the ..... petition by directing the state of kerala, the first respondent, to take necessary steps to identify the zones and generally to fulfil all the requirements of rule 3 of the noise pollution (regulation and control) rules, 2000 within six months from this date. the defined authority under the rules will, thereafter, be entitled to consider the application for use of loud ..... board, will continue to enforce the directions issued by the deputy inspector general of police in the circular dated 22.7.2000 until the required exercise under the noise pollution (regulation and control) rules, 2000 is undertaken by the state government.it is a matter of serious concern that environmental protection laws are not properly implemented and/or enforced .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //