IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI DEVINDER GUPTA, THE CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 13185 of 2002 Between: 1. Mr. Gulzar Hussain, S/o Mir Mukram Ali aged 28 years r/o 11-4-655 Saifabad Hyderabad. 2. Zia K.Iqbal s/o late Iqbal, aged 35 years r/o 11-4-655/1-2, 1st floor, Saifabad Hyderabad. 3. D.Narayana Reddy s/o D.Reddy aged 28 years, r/o 11-4-666, Saifabad, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1. Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad rep. by its Commissioner Lower Tankbund Road, Hyderabad. 2. Hyderabad Urban Development Authority rep. by its V.C. & M.D. 1-8-323, Paigah Palace Police Lines, Secunderabad. 3. Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Works Department rep. by its Managing Director near Visweswaraiah Bhavan Khairatabad, Hyderabad. 4. A.P. Pollution Control Board rep. by its Member Secretary Maitrivanam, HUDA Complex Ameerpet, Hyderabad. 5. The Station House Officer Nampally PoliceStation Nampally, Hyderabad. 6. The Diamond Jubilee School Premises No.11-4-652, Rockland Lakdi-ka-pool, Hyderabad. 7. Saba Function Hall Premises No. 11-4-654 Lakdi-Ka-pool, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an order, direction or writ particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents 1 to 5 in failing to take steps for prevention of the illegal action of respondents 6 & 7 in starting a school and function hall in Lakdi-ka-pool area, Hyderabad as being illegal and unconstitutional. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.S.NIRANJAN REDDY Counsel for Respondent No.1: Mr.Ghanta Rama Rao Counsel for Respondent No.2: Mr.B.Viswanadha Reddy Counsel for Respondent No.3: Mr.P.Kishore Rao Counsel for Respondent o.4: Mr.S.V.Bhatt Counsel for Respondent No.5: G.P. for Home Counsel for Respondent No.6: None appeared. Counsel for Respondent No.7: Mr.C.V.Mohan Reddy. The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: (per The Honourable Sri Devinder Gupta, the Chief Justice) This is a Petition filed as Public Interest Litigation by three individuals residing at Saifabad complaining against the action of Respondents 6 and 7 in running a school and function hall in residential area in premises No. 11-4-652, Rockland and premises No. 11-4-654. Lakdi-ka-pool, Hyderabad. Petitioners are also residents of Lakdi-ka-pool and are stated to be living in the vicinity of the Niloufer Hospital premises. It is stated that respondents 1 to 5 have not taken any steps against Respondent Nos.6 and 7 in running school and function hall in residential area, which are causing environmental problem including noise pollution. In nutshell, the allegations are that illegal acts are being committed by the respondents 6 & 7 by continuing to run the school and function hall. Detailed affidavits in reply have been filed by Respondents 1 and 7. Respondent No.7 has furnished details of various permits and licences obtained for running the function hall. He states that he is an ex-Service Officer of Indian Army and licence- holder of function hall and has never tried to violate any rule or regulation and has not caused any inconvenience to any resident in the surrounding area. Parking is provided inside the compound and the surroundings are maintained cleanly. No orchestra is permitted to be played. He states that number of commercial shops, offices and residential complexes have come up in the vicinity and there is traffic congestion, because of which, there is noise pollution. It is stated that the School has been shifted after permission from the competent authority. There is the latest report dated: 26.8.2004 submitted by the Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board stating that monitoring was done on 25.8.2004 at 2.30 p.m. before the function and at 8.00 p.m. during the function in the presence of the surrounding residents and the representatives of the Function hall and the noise levels are exceeding the limits for residential area even in the absence of orchestra/Band in the function hall. The report says that noise level was higher because of the action on the part of Respondent No.7. So far as noise level is concerned, it is the Commissioner of Police, who is the competent authority under the Rules to hear complaints and pass appropriate orders. In such like petition, when Respondent No.7 continued to run the function hall with various licences, we leave it open to the petitioners to submit a complaint to the Commissioner of Police, in case, Respondent No.7 is exceeding any noise level, and the Commissioner of Police shall take appropriate steps in ensuring the standards of noise. Since the Commissioner of Police is not a party to the Writ Petition, we direct him that as and when petitioners submit any representation, it will be duly considered by him. Ordered accordingly. The Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. ______________________ DEVINDER GUPTA, C.J. 30.9.2004. ________________ C.V.RAMULU, J. VR. To 1. The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, Lower Tankbund Road, Hyderabad. 2. The Vice-Chairman & Managing Director, Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, 1-8-323, Paigah Palace Police Lines, Secunderabad. 3. The Managing Director, Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Works Department, near Visweswaraiah Bhavan Khairatabad, Hyderabad. 4. The Member-Secretary, A.P. Pollution Control Board Maitrivanam, HUDA Complex Ameerpet, Hyderabad. 5. The Station House Officer Nampally Police Station Nampally, Hyderabad. 6. The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad. 7. Two CCs to Govt. Pleader for Home, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT). 8. Two CD copies.