Civil Writ Petition No.13924 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.13924 of 2011 Date of decision: 3.8.2011 M/s Seema Steel Industries and another ...Petitioners Versus The State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present: Mr. Dhirinder Chopra, Advocate for the petitioners. ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, ACJ. This petition seeks quashing of orders dated 19.7.2011 Annexures P-6 and P-7 passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate (West), Ludhiana issuing direction under Rule 8(1)(b) of the Noise Polluttion (Regulation & Control) Rules, 2000 framed under Section 6 read with Section 25 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 prohibiting operation of the industry of the petitioners on account of noise pollution being generated beyond the prescribed level, till noise level is controlled. Case set out in the petition is that on complaint of respondent no.6 Gurcharan Singh to the Pollution Control Board, action was initiated by the Sub Divisional Magistrate (West), Ludhiana respondent no.5 under the rules and impugned orders were passed. The report of the measurement of noise shows that after the petitioners took necessary steps, the noise level had come down. Even without operation of the machines of the petitioners, the noise level was beyond permissible limits and thus, the industries of the petitioners could not be closed on account of higher noise level. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Civil Writ Petition No.13924 of 2011 -2- Reference to the impugned orders shows that complaint was referred to the Environmental Engineer of the Pollution Control Board for investigation and the level of the noise as per monitoring report dated 2.9.2009 was found to be as under:- SR. No. Monitoring Location Noise Level in Leq dB (A) When machine/s in operation When machine/s not in operation 1. South West Corner 86.3 54.8 2. North West Corner 82.8 58.8 3. North East Corner 79.8 59.0 4. Inside the industry 96.8 63.2 5. Inside house of complainant 61.2 54.8 The petitioners failed to take steps and were found to be continuing to generate noise beyond permissible limits even in the fresh report on visit to site on 2.5.2011. The petitioners were given opportunity of being heard. It is clear from the orders that the petitioners have been found to be continuing to generate noise beyond permissible limits. The finding recorded in the impugned order about level of noise is not shown to be malafide, arbitrary or perverse. In view of above, no interference is called for. The writ petition is dismissed. (Adarsh Kumar Goel) Acting Chief Justice August 03, 2011 (Ajay Kumar Mittal) Pka Judge