WPMS 424/2011 Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala, J. Mr. Neeraj Garg, the learned Counsel for the petitioner. Mr. H.M. Raturi, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents no. 1 to 3 & 6. Mr. K.H. Gupta, the learned Counsel for the respondent no. 4. Ms. Puja Banga, the learned Counsel for the respondent no. 7. It is alleged that respondents no. 8 & 9 are running a wedding point opposite the petitioner’s educational institution and are permitting use of loudspeakers at such a high decibel level that it is affecting the teaching of the institution and that the students are also complaining that on account of the noise pollution at night, they are unable to study. In the opinion of the Court, the petitioner should approach the District Magistrate concerned by moving an appropriate representation. Consequently, the writ petition is disposed of with the observation that if such a representation is moved, the authority concerned will consider and decide the matter by a reasoned and speaking order after hearing all concerned parties within four weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. The authority while disposing of the representation will also consider the provisions of Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000. (Tarun Agarwala, J.) 10.3.2011 Prabodh