AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
6 paragraphs · 187 wordsMohammed Nias C.P., J
The petitioners complain of the alleged noise pollution caused by the use of loudspeakers and amplifiers by respondents 9 and 10. It is submitted that respondents 1 to 8 and 11 were bound to take action. It is also submitted that the Corporation had issued Exts.P3 and P4 , but no action was taken thereafter.
I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader, learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation as well as the learned Standing Counsel for the 11th respondent.
The above writ petition is filed in the year 2012. No interim order has been passed in it. None of the counsel is able to submit on the present situation.
4.In such circumstances, the petitioner is directed to file an appropriate complaint, in case of any subsisting grievances before the respondents, more particularly, respondents 2, 3 , 8 and 11. If such a complaint is received by the said respondents, they will look into the same, hear the affected parties and take appropriate decision in accordance with law.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.