BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL

(WESTERN ZONE) BENCH, PUNE

APPLICATION No.8/2015(WZ)

CORAM:

Hon’ble Shri Justice U.D. Salvi

(Judicial Member)

Hon’ble Dr. Ajay A. Deshpande

(Expert Member)

In the matter of:

Sujal Sahakari Gruha Rachana

Sanstha Maryadit,
Through Chairperson Mrs. Ujwala
Vivek Ghanekar,
Age : 57 years, Occ : Business
R/at 402, Sujal Co-op. Housing
Society Ltd.,
100 D.P. Road, Opp. Shubharambha
Lawns,
Patwardhan Baug, Pune – 411 052.
……Applicant

VERSUS

1. The Commissioner,
Pune Municipal Corporation,
Corporation Building, Shivajinagar,
Pune – 411 005.

2. Maharashtra Pollution Control

Board,
Jog Centre, 3rd Floor,
Mumbai – Pune Road, Wakadewadi,
Pune – 411 003.

3. The Chief Engineer,

Khadakwasla Irrigation Division,
Irrigation Department, Govt. of
Maharashtra, Sinchan Bhavan,
Barne Road, Mangalwar Peth, Pune.

4. Director General of Police,

Maharahstra,
Through the Police Commissioner,
Police Commissioner Office,
Pune – 411 001.
Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 1
 5. Ministry of Transport
Through RTO
Sangam Bridge, Pune.

6. Maharashtra State Power

Generation Company Limited
(MAHAGENCO) through
It’s Managing Director
Hongkong Bank Building, M.G.
Road, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001.

7. Secretary, Department of Urban

Development
Room No.423 (Main), Nagar Vikas
Vibhag, Mantralaya,
Mumbai – 400 032.

8. Secretary, Ministry of
Environment and Forests,
Mantralaya, Mumbai – 400 032.

9. Secretary, Home Department

9th Floor, New Administrative
Building, Opposite Mantralaya,
Mumbai – 400 032.

10. Director General of Police

Maharashtra State Police
Headquarters,
Old Council Hall, Shaeed Bhagat
Singh Marg, Mumbai 400 001

11. District Collector

District Collector Office, Yavatmal.

12. District Collector

District Collector Office, Kolhapur.

13. District Collector

District Collector Office,
Sindhudurg.

14. District Collector

District Collector Office,
State Bank Chowk, Buldhana.

15. District Collector

District Collector Office, Jalgaon.

16. District Collector

District Collector Office, Nagpur.
Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 2
 17. Municipal Commissioner
Kolhapur Municipal Corporation
Main Building, Shivaji Chowk,
C-Ward, Kolhapur – 416 002.

18. Chief Executive Officer,

Yawatmal Municipal Council
Azad Maidan, Yawatmal.

19. Chief Executive Officer,

Sindhudurg Municipal Council
Oros, Dist. Sindhudurg.

20. Chief Executive Officer,

Buldhana Municipal Council
Zilla Parishad Buldhana.

21. Chief Executive Officer,

Jalgaon Municipal Council
D-3, Golani Market, 3rd Floor,
Jalgaon.

22. Municipal Commissioner

Nagpur Municipal Corporation
Mahanagar Palika Marg, Civil Lines,
Nagpur, Maharashtra – 440 001.

…..Respondents

Counsel for Applicant:

Mr. Asim Sarode, Advocate.

Counsel for Respondent:

Mr. P.S. Suryavanshi, Advocate for Respondent No.1
Mrs. Supriya Dangare, Advocate for Respondent No.2
Mr. D.D. Shinde, Advocate for Respondent No.3

Date: 3rd July, 2017

JUDGMENT/ORDER

1. The Applicant, a Cooperative Housing Society,

has approached this Tribunal with a substantial issue

relating to environmental pollution and environmental

degradation caused by various marriage halls and

Mangal Karyalayas located on 100 ft DP road starting

Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 3
from Mhatre Bridge to Rajaram bridge in Pune and

invoked provisions of Section 14 and 15 of the National

Green Tribunal Act 2010 for the relief therefrom. The

Applicant alleges that the environmental degradation is

caused due to the encroachment on the designated green

belt area, being within the blue flood line marked along

the river Mutha by such marriage halls. The Applicant

has also generally raised the issue of similar pollution

and environmental degradation caused by marriage

halls/lawns located in the state of Maharashtra.

2. The Applicant submits that their society is

situated at 100 ft DP Road stretching from Mhatre Bridge

to Rajaram Bridge. According to Applicant, there are

more than 4 marriage halls along the DP road, which

have been granted permissions and licenses by the

Respondent Pune Municipal Corporation. The Applicant

submits that the activities of marriage and other

functions/celebrations conducted regularly at these

halls, particularly during evenings, generates significant

environmental pollution - air and noise pollution from

various sources including use of DJ systems, use of fire

crackers, traffic congestion and blowing of horns etc. in

its precincts as well as at the places and also outside the

marriage halls where the procession moves. The

Applicant further submits that these marriage halls are

commercially exploited/ used for large scale marriage

Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 4
functions for entertaining large numbers of guest with

fun and food and the municipal authorities and also

other regulatory authorities including the Maharashtra

Pollution Control Board and Police are required to ensure

that such commercial activities do not cause any

nuisance in terms of environmental pollution in the

surrounding residential area. The Applicant submits that

they have filed regular complaints with the authorities

regarding the pollution and environmental degradation as

well as violation of green belt and blue line restrictions.

However, there is no respite to them as the authorities

have conveniently not acted on their complaints. Similar

objections have also been raised for various marriage

halls situated across the state. The Applicant have

therefore prayed for the following reliefs:

a. Report be called from Respondent No. 1- P. M. C.

regarding all the Marriage Halls, Mangal Karyalaya,
Marriage Lawns in Pune City, their names and
terms and conditions put on them from running the
said Marriage Halls, Mangal Karyalaya and Marriage
Lawns.
b. The Respondent No. 2- MPCB be asked to submit
Environment Status Report (ESR) to the Hon’ble
Tribunal in respect related to Marriage Halls,
Mangal Karyalaya and Marriage Lawns situated on
the 100 ft. D. P. Road from Mhatre Bridge to
Rajaram Bridge in Pune City.

Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 5
 c. The Respondent No. 1 may kindly be penalised
under the provisions mentioned under S. 16 of The
Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.
d. Considering the change in situation and full-fledged
locality in the DP road area near Mhatre Bridge it is
high time to stop the ‘phataka selling’ (cracker
selling) on the DP road and hence directions may be
given to shift this business to some other place.
e. The Respondent Nos. 1,2 and 4 may kindly be
imposed with fine of Rs. 2,00,000/- each for
constantly neglecting the environmental issues and
complaints filed by the Applicant. Such fine
amount may kindly be directed to be used for any
environment preservation cause and awareness
programs to be organised with various social
organizations.
f. Directions may kindly be issued to the Respondent
no. 4 and 6 to ban the use High Powered Beam
Search Lights by civilians and during the marriage
ceremonies.
g. Respondent No. 6 may kindly be directed to make it
compulsory for every marriage hall and Lawns to
have unit of solar energy generation which will save
the electricity consumption and lessen the burden
on environment, Respondent no. 6 may kindly be
directed to frame such Rule or issue some
Notification.
h. Directions may kindly be given to the Respondent
No. 2 to submit detailed report regarding the DP
Road marriage halls in particular and regarding
noise monitoring system being adopted by the
Respondent No.2 in relation to all such Marriage
Lawns/ Halls at various places in Maharashtra.

Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 6
 i. Direction may kindly be given to the Respondent No.
2 and Respondent no. 4 to submit record related to
Maharashtra as to how many complaints they
have received in the year 2011 to 2015 January
regarding Noise and Air pollution due to various
Marriage Halls and Mangal Karyalaya, Lawns and
what is the action taken report.
j. The Respondent No. 7 may kindly be directed to
submit its report as to under what conditions
development of Open Marriage Halls in the Urban
Areas is being permitted.
k. Respondent Nos. 8 to 10 may kindly be directed to
submit District Wise Report as to what legal actions
have been taken against Open Marriage Lawns and
Mangal Karyalayas where constant noise pollution
is occurring.
l. Respondent Nos. 11 to 22 may kindly be submitted
their reply-affidavit on the contentions raised by
many Advocates residing in different cities through
their affidavits regarding open Marriage lawns’/
Mangal Karyalaya’s noise pollution issue.

3. In the present application, the Pune Municipal

Corporation (PMC) which is a planning authority of the

city of the Pune is Respondent No. 1 whereas

Maharashtra Pollution Control Board is Respondent No.

2. The Chief Engineer, Irrigation Department,

Government of Maharashtra is Respondent No. 3 and

Director General of Police, Maharashtra is Respondent

No. 4. The Respondent No.5 to 22 are other local bodies

in the state of Maharashtra.

Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 7
4. The Respondent No. 1, Pune Municipal

Corporation filed an appearance and have filed 4 separate

affidavits related to individual departments of the PMC.

We deprecate such compartmentalized approach of the

PMC departments to deal with the environment in an

effort to isolate the inextricable issues therein. The first

affidavit of Shri Prashant Waghmare City Engineer of the

PMC-Respondent Corporation PMC is filed on 28th May,

2015 reveals that the marriage halls are located on the

DP road in green zone governed by Rule No. M-7.1 of the

Development Control Rules 1987 prescribing the

permissible use of green zone. It further reveals that the

area between Mhatre Bridge and Rajaram Bridge was

inspected by the officials of the Corporation and

unauthorized construction was found in Krishna Sundar

lawn, Krishna Sundar Garden, Sidhi Garden,

Shubharambh lawn and Gharkul lawn. He further

submits that the Corporation has issued them notices

under the relevant provisions of the Town Planning and

Corporation Acts and these notices have subsequently

been challenged by the respective marriage halls before

the Court of Civil Judge/Division wherein status quo

orders have been passed by the Learned Judge.

5. Second affidavit of Respondent No. 1 i.e. PMC is

of Shri Mangesh Dighe Environmental Officer of the

Corporation filed on 28th May, 2015. He submits that the

Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 8
area between Mhatre bridge and Rajaram bridge does not

come within the silence zone. The third affidavit of Shri

Satish Panditrao Kulkarni Deputy Commissioner, Estate

Management Department of the Corporation filed on 28th

May, 2015 discloses that the fire crackers shops and

stalls put up on the DP road get permission to operate

such shops only during Diwali period on a temporary

basis and the stall holders are required to remove their

stalls immediately after Diwali festival. He further

submits that in case any nearby residents has any

objection to such fire crackers shops, they can file their

objections with the Corporation which will be considered

according to law. The fourth affidavit of Dr. Somnath

Tarachand Pardeshi Medical Officer, Health Department

of the Corporation filed on 28th May, 2015 reveals that

temporary permission was given to the Gharkul lawn for

the year 2005 and based on complaints received, such

permission has since been cancelled. He further averred

that all the marriage halls situated on the eastern side of

the DP road are in the green zone and are operating in

the violation of the restrictions imposed on the activities

permissible in the green zone.

6. In short, the Pune Municipal Corporation

submits that all these Mangal Karyalas and marriage

halls are source of noise pollution and are violating the

green zone regulations of the development plan of the city

Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 9
and the Corporation has taken due cognizance of such

violation and issued statutory notices against these illegal

and unauthorized activities; however, the owners of

marriage halls and lawns have filed appeals under the

Town Planning Regulation against such orders in the

Civil Court and obtained stay/status quo orders therein

thereby allowing these Mangal Karyalas to continue their

activities. However, the Corporation has not filed any

documents related to the notices issued to such activities

and only submits that the notices are issued for

violations of town planning regulations.

7. Respondent No. 2 MPCB, has filed affidavit of

Shri Jagannath Shankar Salunkhe, Sub-Regional Officer

of the Board on 7th November, 2015. He averred that as

per the CPCB directions issued under the provisions of

the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974,

marriage hall is not covered as under the categorization

of industry/activity requiring consent to

establish/operate from the Board. It is further submitted

that the MPCB has a very limited role in regulating the

noise in the city area, and the police and municipal

authorities are required to enforce the Noise Rules in view

of the circular of Government of Maharashtra dated 21st

April, 2009. He further submits that the role of the MPCB

is limited to monitor the ambient noise levels in case of

specific request from the authorities and communicate

Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 10
the results to them as per the above government

resolution.

8. We, however, deprecated such a stand of MPCB

and directed it to reconsider the issue afresh by taking

holistic view of the matter strictly as per the provisions of

Water Act, while noting that the CPCB directions are only

issued for uniform categorization of various industries

and activities by various Boards and in no way, can be

construed as the one designed to offer exhaustive list of

industries/activities covered under Water Act thereby

signifying that other activities do not require consent

from the Board. The provisions of Water Act are

absolutely clear and Board is required to strictly comply

with the same.

9. Subsequently, MPCB has informed that they

have reconsidered the matter at the highest level and has

now framed guidelines for the marriage halls and the

club house activities in pursuance to the direction issued

by this Tribunal in Application No. 53/2015 filed by

Mr. Vivek Sheshrao Dhakne Vs. Mahrashtra Tourism

Development Corporation & Ors. These guidelines have

been issued on 24th November, 2016. According to this

circular, the statutory Board of MPCB in its 166th

meeting has resolved to bring the marriage halls/ and

club house activities within the consent regime. Further

elaborate guidelines as regards the environmental

Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 11
protection i.e. Water pollution control, noise pollution

control, solid waste and air pollution control have been

prescribed in the guidelines. The Board has also

conducted noise monitoring in the vicinity of such

marriage halls and the reports indicate that the ambient

noise levels are exceeding the standards.

10. Respondent No. 3 filed an affidavit of the

Executive Engineer, Khadakwasla Irrigation Division and

submitted that they have demarcated the flood lines of

River Mutha within the limits of Pune Municipal

Corporation as per the request of Pune Municipal

Corporation. Such demarcation has been submitted to

the Pune Municipal Corporation and District

Administration vide letter dated 05.03.2011. He further

submits that as per the provisions contemplated under

Section No. 20 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code,

1966, the rivers, streams, nallas, lakes, tanks etc are the

properties of Government of Maharashtra and further, as

per the provisions of the said Act, it shall be lawful for

the Collector to deal with these lands. He further submits

that in case of any violation or encroachment of such

lands the authorities empowered under the Maharashtra

Land Revenue Code, 1966 are empowered to take legal

action. However, this affidavit conspicuously does not

reveal or describe the location of flood lines along the DP

Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 12
Road or the location of such marriage halls and lawns

with respect to such flood lines.

11. The Respondent No. 4 filed an affidavit of Shri.

Sarang Dadaram Awad Deputy Commissioner of Police

on 5th November, 2015 and submits that the Kothrud

Traffic Division from time to time filed several FIRs under

Section 293, 286, 290 and 291 of IPC against the owners

of the marriage halls and lawns situated in disputed

area. He further submits that the traffic branch has

taken initiatives for streamlining the traffic flow on this

road, particularly by erecting iron railing divider,

separate pedestrian walk way, line marking etc. for which

necessary communication has been sent to the Municipal

Corporation. He further submits that regular actions are

being taken for the unauthorized parking in the said

area. He further submits that the traffic branch will act

immediately on the complaints received from the citizens

and take timely action in this regard.

12. Considering the pleadings and also the

documents on record, following issues are required to be

adjudicated by the Tribunal for effective disposal of this

case:

I. Whether the marriage halls/lawns situated at

DP Road are violating the green zone
regulations and blue line restrictions thereby
adversely affecting the environment? If yes,
then what directions can be issued?
Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 13
 II. What precautionary measures are required to
be taken by the Marriage Halls/lawns for
avoiding the pollution due to their activities and
how such measures can be enforced by the
authorities?
13. The Applicant has alleged that the Marriage

Halls/ lawns have been constructed in the Green Zone

and also within the blue line of River Mutha. He has also

alleged that these Marriage Halls/ lawns are situated in

No Development Zone without any permission from the

PMC. Respondent-1, PMC has filed an affidavit dated 28th

May, 2015 and submitted that they have taken suitable

action against the unauthorised construction at some of

the lawns located at DP Road, Pune. However, the

Marriage Halls/ lawns owners have challenged these

directions by filing Civil Suits before the Civil Judge

Junior Division (PMC) Court, Pune and the learned Civil

Judge has passed status quo order/ stay order against

the PMC. The Irrigation Department, Government of

Maharashtra has filed a cryptic affidavit and submitted

that they have submitted the relevant maps of Blue Line

to the PMC and PMC District Collector is required to take

necessary action as per the law. However, they have not

given any details as to whether the Marriage Halls/ lawns

situate at DP Road are within the Blue Line or not.

14. We have perused the affidavits and contentions

of the Respondents. The Tribunal has already dealt with

Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 14
the issue of construction within the Blue Line in

Application No.01/2013 [Sarang Yadwadkar & Ors

Vs. Mrs. Anjali Dinkar Datar & Ors] and Application

No. 2/2013 [Sarang Yadwadkar & Ors. Vs. The

Commissioner & Ors.] and the relevant paras of the

judgment are important to note which are as under:

37. These, amongst others, are a few disadvantages of the

project in question besides there being logistic deficiencies like
lack of permission or grant of improper permission. The need for
the project is sought to be justified on the ground of larger public
interest i.e. providing an alternative route to the commuters as
well as to reduce vehicular pollution. It is expected to solve public
transportation problem of about 5 lakh citizens who rely on the
Sinhagad Road, as their main connectivity by the arterial road to
the city. It is likely to reduce travel time as well as pollution level.
On the contrary, the applicant’s main contention is that besides
causing degradation of the environment, the intention of
Respondent No.1 is to help the property grabbers unauthorisedly
by reclaiming the land, falling even within the red/blue line and
to give them undue advantage. In fact, the real intention of the
respondent is to construct the road by compacting and earth
filling and to facilitate selected private land owners to reclaim the
41 river bed up to the road by converting no development zone
inside the flood plain into residential zone. Of course, this
allegation has been refuted by Respondent No.1. It is also argued
on behalf of Respondent No.1 that raising construction on
elevated pillars would prove much more expensive than its
construction by compacting and earth filling. This argument does
not impress us. If the Corporation-authorities have taken a
decision to take up the project in public interest, then it must also
bear its cost and higher cost, if necessary and also unavoidable
in the larger environmental interest. The authorities cannot be
permitted to cause irreversible damage to the environment and
ecology of the area and even expose the inhabitants of the
vicinity to undue flood risks on the ground that the project is
being taken up in public interest merely for providing an

Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 15
 alternative road and for reducing the vehicular pollution. Firstly,
Respondent No.1 has not placed any scientific data or analysis
on record before us in support of its contention, even for the sake
of arguments, that there would be reduction in environmental
pollution and great convenience will accrue to the public by
reduction in the travel time. Applying the principle of
proportionality, even if an alternative route is provided, still the
balance would tilt in favour of environment and we would still
require Respondent No.1 to carry out the project subject to such
conditions which would strive equitable balance between the
development on the one hand and the environment on the other.
If Respondent No.1 is of the firm view, and particularly in view of
the NOC dated 15th April, 2013 having been issued by 42
Irrigation Department, to carry out the project, then it has to be
subject to such stringent conditions as would protect the
environment and ecology as well as greater public interest by
preventing floods etc. Keeping in view the above rival contentions
and the facts of the present case, normally, we would have
accepted the petition and prohibited carrying out the project any
further with the specific demolition of the part of the road. The
road can be raised by elevated pillars in the area that will fall
within the blue line or inside the blue line. The construction of
elevated pillars at that stage would neither obstruct the flow of
the river nor narrow the flood plain. Furthermore, it will also help
the storm or drain water to freely join the river during larger part
of the area.
38. However, keeping in mind the public interest, that by
imposition of certain conditions, environmental and ecological
interests can be safeguarded, we would permit Respondent No.1
to complete the project. Accordingly, we impose the following
conditions subject to which the project could continue:
(a) The interim order dated 4th January, 2013 and
subsequent interim orders shall stand vacated and
Respondent No.1 would be permitted to carry out and
complete the project of building only 24 metre wide road from
Vitthalwadi to NH-4 bypass as shown in Annexure R-2/1
strictly and subject to the conditions stated hereinafter.
(b) Respondent No.1 shall make every effort to realign the
road to bring it as far as possible closer to and beyond the
blue line, right from chainage of 0+400 to 1+750 of Exh.
Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 16
 Annexure 2/1. It shall ensure to extend the least part of the
project in the river bed/blue line.
(c) The road/project shall be constructed on elevated pillars
alone in the area that falls within the blue line.
(d) We direct Respondent No.1 to remove the debris
dumped at the present site and shift the same to the red line
by following 1 in 25 years rule.
(e) A massive plantation should be undertaken on both
sides of the river, also in the no-development zone by
Respondent No.1 as well as the State Government of
Maharashtra. Adequate protective measures should be
undertaken to prevent flooding and submerging of the
residential area along the proposed road.
(f) The conditions imposed by the Chief Engineer, Irrigation
Department, vide his NOC dated 15th April, 2013 shall
mutatis mutandis be part of the present directions. The same
shall be read in aid and not in derogation to the conditions
stated in this order.
(g) As already noticed and highlighted during the course of
the hearing, a large number of structures have come up at and
even inside the blue line of the river Mutha. Respondent No.1
itself has issued notice to some of such structures for
demolition. Thus, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of 44
the case, we further direct that Respondents No.1, 3 and 4
shall take appropriate steps against unauthorised
constructions, if any, raised on and inside the blue line and
pass order of demolition or such other order as is permissible
in accordance with law. We also direct the said authorities to
ensure that no encroachment is permitted and no construction
in future is permitted on and inside the blue line of the river
Mutha.

The Tribunal has ordered to remove the road

development works within the blue line area. Incidentally

the area covered in the said judgment is proximate to the

area in question in this petition also. And therefore the

findings of the Tribunal in these cases will apply mutatis

Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 17
mutandi in the present case also. We also take a judicial

note that the substantive appeal against this judgment

has been dismissed by Apex Court (Civil Appeal Diary

No(s). 3445/2015: The Commissioner PMC Vrs.

Sarang Yadwadkar) and therefore, the judgments in

these cases have attained finality. These matters are

already in execution proceedings before the Tribunal in

Execution Application No.18/2017 and Execution

Application No.19/2017.

15. The Tribunal has dealt with Green Belt and its

relevance with environmental base line and the relevant

Judgments are referred to herein below:

(i) Gaur Green City Residents Welfare

Association, Through the Secretary Shri
Jigyasu Pant Vs. The State of U.P. Through
the Secretary, Ministry of Urban Development
and Ors. [Original Application No.33/2012,
Decided on 21.08.2013].

An Application filed under Section 14 of the

National Green Tribunal Act, 2010. The Applicant
challenges installation of a 400 KV Gas Insulated
Power Sub-station (for short GIS) over Green Belt
running parallel of NH-24. The Tribunal
dismissed the application but with the direction
that project proponent shall undertake work of
landscaping, plantation, afforestation and
beautification of the open spaces available
beyond the GIS Power Sub-station and boundary
wall of the Gaur Green City. The Project
Proponent shall also simultaneously commence
landscaping and beautification work as per plan
of Horticulture Department and shall not make
the proposed Power Sub-station operational
without completion of such work.

Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 18
 (ii) Sunil Kumar Chugh and Ors. Vs. Secretary,
Environment Department, Government of
Maharashtra & Ors. [Appeal No.66/2014,
Decided on 03.09.2015]. The Hon’ble Principal
Bench considered the importance of open
recreation spaces for ensuring clean and healthy
environment and need for making right use of
land for right purpose. Any illegal and
unauthorized diversion of space reserved for
Garden or recreation ground under the
sanctioned layout to any other use, therefore,
cannot be countenanced with and such
tampering with the layout is bound to have
spaces, recreational grounds and adequate
parking facilities in buildings had an important
bearing on the right to life of people.

(iii) Nanik Rupani and Ors. Vs. Secretary, MoEF

and Ors. [Application No.134/2015, Decided
on 28.02.2017]. The Application has been
moved for restitution of area devastated by hill-
cutting or excavation and tree felling, sometime
around December, 2014 to make illegal,
unauthorized road connecting Plot No.47 to 14 in
the area popularly known as ‘Vikas Valley’ and
for relief of injunction restraining such acts at the
site. The Tribunal referring to the landmark
Judgment of NGT Principal Bench in Sunil
Kumar Chugh case directed that Respondents
shall not carry out hill cutting & felling of trees in
the project area. The Tribunal also directed the
respondents to restore the said area to its original
position.

16. Undoubtedly, the Corporation and Irrigation

Department are unanimous on the fact that these

marriage halls/ lawns are located within the Blue Line

area, either fully or partially. It is, therefore, incumbent

upon these departments to ensure that these

unauthorized and illegal structures within the blue line

area are immediately removed to avoid any blockage or

Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 19
restriction of the river water flow. Issue No. I is

accordingly answered in Affirmative.

17. This particular application was initially filed

mainly challenging the noise pollution caused due to the

activities of marriage halls/lawns situate at DP Road,

Pune. It was also alleged that these marriage halls and

lawns are violating the green zone regulations and blue

line restrictions thereby adversely affecting the

environment. The Respondent No.1 – PMC and

Respondent No.2 – MPCB have admitted that the

activities of marriage halls and Mangal Karyalayas cause

noise pollution if the activities remain uncontrolled and

unabated. It is also submitted that the activities like

serving food to the large numbers of assembled guests

also generate significant solid waste and trade effluent

which are required to be properly treated before its

disposal of for avoiding environmental pollution. It is to

be noted that initially MPCB’s stand was that these

activities are not covered under the Water (Prevention

and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and therefore, they

are not under any obligation to control the pollution at

marriage halls/lawns. After detailed discussion before us,

the MPCB had taken a review of its stand and realized

the need to cover the marriage halls/lawns under the

consent regime in a bid to perform its functions as per

the provisions of the Water (Prevention and Control of

Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 20
Pollution) Act, 1974 in its 166th Meeting held on 20th

August, 2016 for the prevention of environmental

pollution; and has approved and issued elaborate

guidelines for the Marriage Halls/Lawns as per the

provisions of the Water (Prevention and Control of

Pollution) Act, 1974 and the Air (Prevention and Control

of Pollution) Act, 1981. The decision of the Board is

reproduced below:

“Resolution:-

Board has considered the above proposal and principally

agreed the committee recommendations for bringing Marriage
Halls/lawns/club houses in consent regime of the Board.
Further Board has resolved that:-

1. The Marriage halls/ lawns/ Club Houses as defined in

the Group A located in Municipal Corporation or “A”
class Municipal Council or MMRDA or PMRDA or
CIDCO or NIT Nagpur or Cantonment Boards within
Corporation/ A Class Municipal Council or
Cantonment Boards surrounding (within 5 kms radius
from the boundary) Corporation or A Class Municipal
Council shall be brought under the purview of consent
management regime of the Board and they shall apply to
the Board for obtaining consent under Water and Air Act.

(In order to avoid ambiguity in calculation of gathering

capacity of a person, Standards Floor Space Index (FSI) as
defined by Public Works Department (PWD) and Building
Code shall be used)

2. (a) The Marriage halls/ lawns/ Club Houses as defined in

the Group A located in B, C and D and Zilla Parishad,
Nagar Panchayat, shall follow guidelines, separately
prepared by Maharashtra Pollution Control Board
which will be enforced through concerned planning
authorities.
Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 21
 (b) The Marriage halls/ lawns/ Club Houses as defined in
the Group B located in Municipal Corporation or “A”
class Municipal Council or MMRDA or PMRDA or
CIDCO or NIT Nagpur or Cantonment Boards within
Corporation/ A Class Municipal Council or
Cantonment Boards surrounding (within 5 kms radius
from the boundary) Corporation or A Class Municipal
Council including Municipal Council B, C and D and
Zilla Parishad, Nagar Panchayat, shall follow
guidelines, separately prepared by Maharashtra
Pollution Control Board which will be enforced
through concerned planning authorities.

Member Secretary is authorised to take further necessary

action.”

18. With such a decision taken by the Board, one of

the main grievance of the Applicant that these marriage

halls and lawns are not regulated, is adequately

addressed. The Board with its revised stand is now

bound to enforce the provisions of Water and Air Act for

such marriage halls/ lawns and regulate the activities of

these marriage halls/ lawns so as to ensure that they are

carried out in an environmentally benign manner.

19. Respondent No.1 – PMC has also considered this

aspect and submitted that the people staying around

such marriage halls/ lawns are the victims of noise

pollution due to loud music played in the marriage halls/

lawns as well as marriage processions. At the same time,

the Corporation has submitted that they have minimum

trained manpower in the field of environment and

therefore, Police Authorities and MPCB shall be entrusted

Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 22
with the responsibility to deal with the noise related

complaints. Furthermore, PMC has also suggested that

the marriage hall/ lawn owners should be held

responsible and accountable for pollution and violation of

the environmental norms as these halls/ lawns are

carrying out commercial activities and while conducting

such commercial activities, they should not be allowed to

cause pollution or nuisance adversely affecting the

nearby residents. PMC has also suggested that bursting

of fire-crackers and use of vehicles mounted with high

pitched sound generating DJ systems should be

completely banned in and around marriage halls/ lawns.

PMC has also recommended that public awareness

campaign needs to be undertaken to avoid noisy marriage

functions.

20. Marriages have become increasingly boisterous

affair wherein the individuals often tends to forget their

obligations towards the society. Marriage halls/ lawns

thus become epi-centre of environmental pollution in

terms of air, water and noise pollution. Being commercial

ventures these marriage halls/ lawns are often used for

hosting “no bar” affairs thereby exposing the citizens to

the adverse impact of environmental pollution and are

unwilling to risk their commercial interests at the cost of

‘displeasure’ to the customers. Surveys of the respective

marriage halls/lawns carried out by the MPCB to get

Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 23
their environmental status have revealed substantial

contribution of environmental pollution due to their

functioning in terms of increased noise levels, sewage and

MSW generation vide affidavit dated 10th December,

2016. Immediate and noticeable effect of this

environmental pollution is felt with the increased noise

levels. Noise pollution is silent killer. Generally, people of

tender and old age are more susceptible to the adverse

effects of the noise pollution. With increasing

urbanization the adverse impacts of the environmental

pollution get more pronounced and regularization of the

activities contributing to such environmental pollution

becomes imperative.

21. The Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay,

when confronted with similar issues of public importance

namely, obstruction of vehicular and pedestrian traffic

causing enormous inconvenience to the citizens and

increased noise levels in Public Interest Litigations (PILs)

– PIL No.173/2010 [Dr. Mahesh Vijay Bedekar Vs. The

State of Maharashtra & Ors], PIL No. 161/2015 [Ms.

Taramati Sadanand Pathak Vs. Commissioner of

Police, Pune], Cri. PIL No.20/2015 [Santosh

Shrikrishna Pachalag Vs. The State of Maharashtra

& Ors.], Cr. PIL No.23/2015 [Shailendra Dixit s/o

Prabhakar Dixit Vs. The State of Maharashtra &

Ors], PIL No.74/2007 [Madhav Sakharam Rane & 2

Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 24
Ors Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors], PIL No.83/2010

[Society for Fast Justice and Anr. Vs. The State of

Maharashtra & Ors.], Writ Petition No.2053/2003

[Dr. Yeshwant Trimbak Oke & Ors. Vs. Union of India

& Ors.], PIL No.85/2007 [Awaaz Foundation and Anr.

Vs. The State of Maharashtra thru The Principal

Secretary & 5 Ors], dealt comprehensively with the

effect of noise pollution and implementation of Noise

Pollution Rules and passed several directions mandating

the State Government, its limbs and Maharashtra

Pollution Control Board as well as the Municipal

Corporations to discharge their obligations under the

Noise Pollution Rules, 2000 and to ensure meaningful

implementation of the said Rules. Strict and faithful

compliance of these directions is, therefore, necessary to

give relief to the citizens affected with environmental

pollution, particularly of the kind in the present case.

22. The authorities/bodies before us – Corporations,

Councils, Collector Sub-District, Maharashtra Pollution

Control Board, Police and Transport Department, though

after debate before us, have conceded to the proposition

that they have definite role to play in the prevention and

control of environmental pollution caused by marriage

halls/lawns; and therefore, are under obligation to

enforce the environmental regulations jointly and

severally at the marriage halls/ lawns. G.R. No.Sound

Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 25
Pollution-2009/Pr.Kr.95/1 dated 21st April, 2009 of

Government of Maharashtra has voiced the concern of

the State regarding increasing noise pollution and

sources of environmental pollution and exhorted its

different organs to implement Noise Pollution Rules, 2000

effectively. This G.R. thus emphasis the need for

concerted actions by all its limbs for preventing and

controlling environmental pollution.

23. We have noted that PMC has already notified

Silence Zones in the city of Pune and prepared list of the

Silence Zones and publicly listed Silence Zones in PMC

area which is on its website for public information. Now it

is necessary for all other urban local bodies in the State

to ensure that the Silence Zones are properly notified and

demarcated on the city maps and then placed in the

public domain for public information. Noise Rules, 2000

requires such exercise of identifying the Silence Zones to

be carried out within short timeframe.

24. The Applicant pointed out that vehicles fitted

with High Decibel Sound Amplifying Systems are illegally

and unauthorizedly used in marriage procession.

Generally, deafening high pitch sound has direct effect on

human health and the authorities often turn deaf ear to

the complaints made by citizens to that regard. Not only

in such marriage processions but also in religious and

Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 26
political processions we find illegal and unauthorized use

of such vehicles fitted with such high decibel sound

amplifying system to the detriment of the environment,

consequently the human health. All these need to be

controlled.

25. We, therefore, feel it necessary that such use of

vehicles mounted with high pitch sound amplifying

system is required to be banned for curbing the noise

pollution. It is also important to note that during the

processions, these sound systems mounted on vehicles

are also used when the procession passes through the

various Silence Zones thereby unabashedly violating the

provisions of the Noise Rules and causing continuous

nuisance to the population. And, therefore, the Issue

No.II is answered in affirmative and the suitable

directions are passed as under.

26. In view of the aforesaid discussions and on

application of the principles of sustainable development

and precautionary principles, we are inclined to issue the

following directions:

a) All the directions issued by the Hon’ble High Court

of Judicature at Bombay in PIL Nos. namely
173/2010 and Ors. [Dr. Mahesh Vijay Bedekar
Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others] shall be
strictly complied with by all the Respondents.

Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 27
 b) The Maharashtra Pollution Control Board is directed
to regulate the activities at marriage halls/ lawns as
per the guidelines framed by them in performance of
its functions under Water (Prevention and Control of
Pollution) Act, 1974 and Air (Prevention and Control
of Pollution) Act, 1981 within a period of next 02
months. In case of non-compliance, the Board shall
take suitable legal action including that of closure of
non-complying marriage halls/ lawns.

c) The marriage halls/ lawns shall be directed by

respective urban local bodies/ authorities to
segregate their solid waste and treat and dispose of
the same through composting or bio-methenation
within their premises and handover recyclable
material either to the authorized waste pickers or
the authorized recyclers as per the Solid Waste
Management Rules, 2016. In case of unauthorized
haphazard dumping of the solid waste by the
marriage Halls/ lawns, they will be liable to pay
Rs.50,000/- as environmental cost per incident to
respective urban local body and the same shall be
recovered from them by respective urban local body.

d) There shall not be any use of loud speakers and

bursting of fire crackers at the marriage halls/
lawns without specific written permission from the
competent authority contemplated by Noise Rules,
2000 or any other law for time being in force in that
regard.

e) Owner/s of the marriage halls/ lawns shall be

responsible for compliance of all the directions
passed herein and shall be liable for legal action
including prosecution by competent authority in
case of non-compliance.
Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 28
 f) Use of vehicles mounted with high pitch sound
amplifying system without valid permission from the
competent authority is strictly prohibited.

g) The Transport Commissioner and the concerned

Police Authority shall remain responsible to enforce
these directions; and they shall immediately
confiscate and seize such unauthorized vehicle/s
mounted with high decibel sound amplifying system
and shall not release the same without express
permission from the Tribunal. The owner of such
vehicle shall be liable to pay environmental
compensation of Rs.50,000/- for every such
incident of use apart from any further cost as
decided by the Tribunal.

h) The Transport and Police Authority shall ensure

that the sound systems are not used in notified
Silence Zones.

i) The Transport Department and MPCB shall give

wide publicity to the above directions. The
Transport Department shall also publish separate e-
mail address and Whatsapp number within 2 weeks
to enable the general public to send details of
unauthorised vehicles mounted with high decibel
sound amplifying systems for necessary action.

j) The Respondent No.1 - PMC and Respondent-3

Chief Engineer, Irrigation Department are directed
to jointly identify the unauthorized construction
and/or dumping carried out by the marriage
halls/lawns, within the blue line flood zone of River
Mutha along the DP Road Pune stretching from
Mhatre Bridge to Rajaram Bridge, within 02 weeks
from today and carry out demolition/removal of
such construction/dumping/filling for ecological
Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 29
 restoration of riverine zone of River Mutha within 04
weeks thereafter. Commissioner PMC and Chief
Engineer Irrigation Department shall file a
compliance affidavit promptly after the compliance
period. Collector, Pune and Commissioner of Police,
Pune are directed to provide all necessary help to
the PMC and Chief Engineer Irrigation Department
for compliance of the above directions.

The Application No. 8 of 2015 accordingly stands

disposed. No costs.

….…………….………………., JM
(Justice U.D. Salvi)

....….…….…………………….,EM
(Dr. Ajay A. Deshpande)

Date :3rd July, 2017

mk

Judgment(Application No.8-2015) 30