IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 1ST NOVEMBER 2010 / 10TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 29889 of 2010(I) ------------------------- PETITIONER : ------------------ VIJAYAN, S/O.KOCHAN, CHARUVILA VEEDU, VATTAPACHA, THATTATHUMALA P.O., PAZHAYAKUNNUMMEL VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DT. BY ADV. SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 001. 2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KILIMANOOR POLICE STATION – 695 601. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KILIMANOOR POLICE STATION – 695 601. 4. S.SALIM, SECRETARY, KHADARIYA THAIKAVU, VATTAPACHA, THATTATHUMALA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DT – 695 614. 5. MOHAMMED SALI, PRESIDENT, KHADARIYA THAIKAVU, VATTAPACHA, THATTATHUMALA PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DT – 695 614. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P. NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 29889 of 2010 I ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 1st day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner approached this Court complaining that respondents 4 and 5 are using loudspeakers, in violation of the provisions contained in the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control Rules) Kerala 2000 and seeking action to be initiated against the aforesaid respondents. 2. Case was adjourned with direction to the learned Government Pleader to obtain instructions in the matter. Accordingly, learned Government Pleader has obtained instructions from the second respondent. It is stated that they have received a complaint from the petitioner and that thereupon, the third respondent inspected the premises of respondents 4 and 5. Then, it was revealed that they are using loudspeakers, without sanction. It is stated that they were directed not to use loudspeakers and were advised to obtain sanction. W.P.(C) No.29889/2010 : 2 : 3. The submission made by the learned Government Pleader that loudspeakers are not in use now is disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. However, from the submissions made by the learned Government Pleader, it is evident that on receipt of the complaint from the petitioner, respondents 2 and 3 have taken action in the matter. In that view of the matter, recording the submission made by the learned Government Pleader, the writ petition is disposed of, directing that in the event the petitioner has any complaint that respondents 4 and 5 are continuing to use loudspeakers illegally, it will be open to the petitioner to file an appropriate complaint before the second respondent and the second respondent shall consider the same in accordance with law. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) aks