Madras High Court
S.R.Nallasivam vs The District Collector on 29 October, 2021
W.P.No.941 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 29.10.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
W.P.No. 941 of 2016
S.R.Nallasivam ... Petitioner
Vs
1. The District Collector,
Erode District,
Erode.
2. The Divisional Manager,
Salem Division,
Southern Railways,
Salem.
3. The Inspector of Police,
Modakkuruchi Police Station,
Modakkurrichi,
Erode District. ...Respondents
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents herein not to
grant permission for gatherings and usage of loud speakers in the vacant
piece of land belonging to the Railways near Railway track abetting
Vanniyar Street, Savadipalayam Pudur, Nanjai Uthukuli Village, Erode
1/12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.941 of 2016
District, affecting the usage of the Street, their movement and the normal
life of the residents therein, in any manner.
For Petitioner : Mr.D.Selvaraju
For Respondents : Mr.C.Kathiravan
Government Advocate
[For R1 and R3]
Mr.P.T.Ramkumar
[For R2]
ORDER
The relief sought for in the present writ petition is to direct the
respondents not to grant permission for gatherings and usage of loud
speakers in the vacant piece of land belonging to the Railways near Railway
track abetting Vanniyar Street, Savadipalayam Pudur, Nanjai Uthukuli
Village, Erode District, affecting the usage of the Street, their movement
and the normal life of the residents.
2. The petitioner is a resident of Savadipalaym Pudur in Nangai
Uthukuli Village, Erode District. He owns a house and landed properties in
the said village. The petitioner is the president of Nanjai Uthukuli Village
Vinayagar Nagar, Savadipalaym Pudur Residents Welfare Associations,
registered under Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975 with
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.941 of 2016
Sl.No.68/2014.
3. The grievances of the writ petitioner is that abetting the Railway
Track from Erode to Trichy in their village, there is a small piece of land
belonging to Railways at the end of our street. The petitioner states that
though the area is very small, some miscreants in the name of youths belong
to the village are often misusing the said piece of land for their unlawful
gatherings, and creating great nuisance to the residents of the street by
parking vehicles in the street and raising flutter of huge noise through loud
speakers. Especially, during festival seasons, these persons are arranging
music feast with loud speakers of high decibels and giving unbearable
nuisance by blocking the street.
4. The petitioner states that several complaints were given and no
action has been initiated. Thus, the petitioner is constrained to move the
present writ petition.
5. The letter dated 24.01.2013 issued by Divisional Railway Manager
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.941 of 2016
(Works), Southern Railway, Salem, indicates that permission for conducting
Pongal festival cultural and sports events were granted.
6. No doubt, the land belongs to the Railways may be utilized for
celebrations. However, creation of nuisance by using loudspeakers beyond
the permissible decibels are to be controlled by the authorities competent.
Usage of land, grant of permission is the administrative decision to be taken
by the authorities. However, such usage should not cause inconvenience,
nuisance to the residents of that locality. The authorities, who are granting
permission, is duty bound to ensure that the rights of other citizen in the
nearby vicinity and locality are also protected. While granting permission,
the fundamental rights of other citizens is to be taken care of, failing which,
the authorities are liable for actions under the relevant laws.
7. This being the constitutional requirement of the public authorities,
any person making complaints about the nuisance in residential area or
usage of loudspeakers beyond the decibels, actions are to be initiated as
such infringement amounts to invasion of fundamental rights of a citizen.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.941 of 2016
8. The principles in this regard are elaborately considered by this
Court in W.P.No.887 of 2015 and the judgment was delivered on
26.10.2021 and the relevant paragraphs are extracted hereunder:
“30. It is relevant to consider the Noise Pollution
(Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000, which was published in
the Gazette of India vide S.O. 123(E) dated 14.02.2000 and
subsequently amended on 22.11.2000, 11.10.2002, 19.09.2006
and 11.01.2010 under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.
31. Under the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control)
Rules, 2000, the Authorities are bound to initiate action if
violations are brought to their notice or complaints are made.
Rule 2(c) defines 'Authority' means and includes any authority
or officer authorized by the Central Government, or as the case
may be, the State Government in accordance with the laws in
force and includes a District Magistrate, Police Commissioner,
or any other officer not below the rank of the Deputy
Superintendent of Police designated for the maintenance of the
ambient air quality standards in respect of noise under any law
for the time being in force”.
32. Rule 5 imposes restrictions on the use of loud
speakers / public address system and sound producing
instruments. Sub Rule (1) contemplates "a loud speaker or a
public address system shall not be used except after obtaining
written permission from the authority". Sub Rule (2) denotes “a
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.941 of 2016
loud speaker or a public address system or any sound
producing instrument or a musical instrument or a sound
amplifier shall not be used at night time except in closed
premises for communication within, like auditoria, conference
rooms, community halls, banquet halls or during a public
emergency”.
33. Rule 7 stipulates 'complaints to be made to the
Authority'. Sub Rule (2) to Rule 7 contemplates “the Authority
shall act on the complaint and take action against the violator
in accordance with the provisions of these rules and any other
law in force”.
34. Rule 8 provides “power to prohibit etc. continuance
of music sound or noise” and Schedule provides “Ambient Air
Quality Standards in respect of Noise”.
35. In respect of the actions to be initiated Environment
(Protection) Act, 1986, more specifically Section 15 provides
'Penalty for Contravention of the Provisions of the Act and the
Rules, Orders and Directions'. The noise pollution, regulation
and control rules are notified under the provisions of the
Environment (Protection) Act, more specifically, by invoking
Section 25. Thus if any violations of such Rules or directions
are established/ proved, then penalty for contravention of the
provisions of the Act and also the Rules are to be imposed.
36. Sub section (1) to Section 15 of the Environment
(Protection) Act, 1986 contemplates “whoever fails to comply
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.941 of 2016
with or contravenes any of the provisions of this Act, or the
rules made or orders or directions issued thereunder, shall, in
respect of each such failure or contravention, be punishable
with imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years
with fine which may extend to one lakh rupees, or with both,
and in case the failure or contravention continues, with
additional fine which may extend to five thousand rupees for
every day during which such failure or contravention continues
after the conviction for the first such failure or contravention”.
37. Therefore, laws in force are to be enforced by the
public authorities. It is not as if the laws are enacted for the
purpose of keeping it in Books. Thus the Authorities are to be
sensitised to protect the fundamental rights of every citizen of
this Great Nation. Our country had enacted effective and
efficient laws in order to protect the rights of the citizen.
However, its implementation lacks. Thus, the Authorities are to
be sensitised. They can never be allowed to take a partisan
attitude in the matter of implementing the laws in force. Non
implementation or improper implementation must be viewed
seriously as it infringes the rights of the citizen at large.
38. In a vibrant democracy, the rights of the citizen are
valuable and paramount importance. Of course fundamental
duties are to be borne in mind and reminded off. Fundamental
duties under Article 51-A of the Indian Constitution must go
together with the rights and the duties are corresponding in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.941 of 2016
nature and thus, exercise of rights is to be done only keeping in
mind the duties involved. Any Religious Institution exercising
their right must be reminded off their duties towards other
citizen, upon whose rights are also to be protected.
Unfortunately such situation is not prevailing in this Great
Nation in view of the lackadaisical approach of the Authorities
in the matter of dealing with the violations and infringement of
the rights.
39. One may form an opinion that it would be sensitive if
any actions are initiated. However, they are forgetting the other
side that inaction will lead to further chaos. Thus actions then
and there on noticing the irregularities and illegalities are of
paramount importance, which is the duty mandated on the
authorities.
40. Importantly, Section 19 of the Environment
(Protection) Act, 1986 contemplates 'cognizance of offences'.
Accordingly a complaint is to be made by the persons. Thus sub
clause (b) to Section 19 empowers the any person given a
complaint by issuing notice of not less than 60 days. Thus any
person is empowered to send complaint in the manner
prescribed.
41. This Court is of the considered opinion that all
Religious Institutions must adhere to the Rules of law for the
purpose of conducting their respective religious activities. Any
such religious activities affecting the rights of the other citizen
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.941 of 2016
and any infringement of rights under the Constitution of India
must be viewed seriously and all appropriate actions are to be
initiated in the event of any complaint or otherwise.
42. The prevailing situation cannot be brushed aside by
this Court. The prevailing situation though painful is to be
improved only through effective actions of the Public
Authorities. There are many Religious Institutions across the
State of Tamil Nadu are violating the noise pollution and
Regulation Control Rules and the provisions of the other
Statutes. However officials are insensitive in the matter of
initiation of actions regarding such violations. Thus, the State
is duty bound to sensitise the Authorities for the purpose of
protection of the fundamental rights of the citizen of our Great
Nation.
43. Enacting the Laws or insufficient implementation of
Laws are to be deprecated. Laws are enacted to protect the
rights of the citizen under the Constitution. If such Laws are not
implemented effectively, then also we are committing an act of
unconstitutionality. Thus, unconstitutionality is not only
relatable to the provisions of the Statute, but also relatable to
an ineffective or non-implementation of the Statutes resulting
violations of rights ending unconstitutionality. Thus, the State
must act in consonance with the constitutional principles and
the laws enacted for the purpose of protecting the rights of the
citizen, more specifically, with reference to the religious rights.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.941 of 2016
44. In view of the fact that many such complaints are
raised across the State of Tamil Nadu and many people are
hesitating to inform and submit complaint in these aspects as
they are afraid of giving such complaints on account of
religious sentiments, and due to fanatic approach of few fringe
groups.”
9. In view of the principles read by this Court in the judgment cited
supra, the case of the petitioner in the present writ petition is to be
considered. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to initiate action, in
the event of any violations of any nature or causing nuisance for the
residents of that locality by usage of loudspeakers beyond the decibels and
prosecute them in the manner known to law.
10. With this direction, the writ petition stands allowed. No costs. No
costs.
29.10.2021
Internet:Yes
Index : Yes
Speaking order:Yes
nti/kak
To
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.941 of 2016
1. The District Collector,
Erode District,
Erode.
2. The Divisional Manager,
Salem Division,
Southern Railways,
Salem.
3. The Inspector of Police,
Modakkuruchi Police Station,
Modakkurrichi,
Erode District.
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.941 of 2016
nti/kak
W.P.No. 941 of 2016
29.10.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
