CWP No.4675 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.4675 of 2009 Date of decision : May 15, 2009 Dinesh Goel ...Petitioner VERSUS State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present: Mr. Rakesh Bhatia, Advocate, for the petitioner. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? HEMANT GUPTA, J. The present petition, in public interest, has claimed firstly strict compliance of Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000 so as to take action against violators and not to give permission for use of loudspeakers and music systems in silence zones and secondly to take action against commercial vehicles for using pressure/musical horns in the local areas of State of Punjab. The petitioner has alleged to have made a representation to the learned Deputy Commissioner in respect of the aforesaid grievances. CWP No.4675 of 2009 -2- After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, we do not find any directions are required to be issued in the present case as we find that Supreme Court has already issued directions in Noise Pollution (I), IN RE vs. Union of India and another, 2005(5) SCC 727. Relevant directions read as under:- “XII. Directions It is hereby directed as under: (i) Firecrackers XXX XXX (ii) Loudspeakers 175. 1. The noise level at the boundary of the public place, where loudspeaker or public address system or any other noise source is being used shall not exceed 10 dB(A) above the ambient noise standards for the area or 75 dB(A) whichever is lower. 2. No one shall beat a drum or tom-tom or blow a trumpet or beat or sound any instrument or use any sound amplifier at night (between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m.) except in public emergencies. 3. The peripheral noise level of privately-owned sound system shall not exceed by more than 5 dB(A) than the ambient air-quality standard specified for the area in which it is used, at the boundary of the private place. (iii) Vehicular noise 176. No horn should be allowed to be used at night (between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m.) in residential areas except in exceptional circumstances. (iv) Awareness XXX XXX (v) Generally CWP No.4675 of 2009 -3- 178. 1. The States shall make provision for seizure and confiscation of loudspeakers, amplifiers and such other equipment as are found to be creating noise beyond the permissible limits. 2. Rule 3 of the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000 makes provision for specifying ambient air-quality standards in respect of noise for different areas/zones, categorization of the areas for the purpose of implementation of noise standards, authorizing the authorities for enforcement and achievement of laid down standards. The Central Government/State Governments shall take steps for laying down such standards and notifying the authorities where it has not already been done.” A Division Bench of this Court in a judgment reported as has also issued directions in Namit Kumar vs. U.T. Chandigarh, 1998(3) RCR (Civil) 367 in respect of use of pressure/musical horns. It was directed to the following effect:- “No power or musical horns shall be permitted in any vehicle light or heavy. In other words, only the standard horns which are fixed by the manufacturer of the car would be permitted strictly in adherence to the provisions of Rule 119 of the Rules. All vehicles, buses, trucks and cars which are fitted with power or musical horns shall remove the same within a period of 15 days from the date of pronouncement of this judgment.” All Government and private vehicles were directed to be strictly complied with the aforesaid directions. In view of the above that directions in respect of noise pollution on account of use of loud speakers & musical/pressure CWP No.4675 of 2009 -4- horns have already been issued, no further directions are required to be issued in the present petition. Therefore, we dispose of the present writ petition with a direction to the learned Deputy Commissioner to decide the representation submitted by the petitioner and to take such necessary action as is contemplated in law. In the event, the directions mentioned above are not complied with, the petitioner shall have liberty to take recourse to the remedy including that of the contempt of the directions in an appropriate forum in accordance with law. Writ petition is disposed of accordingly. (T.S. THAKUR) (HEMANT GUPTA) CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE May 15, 2009 manju