Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 180 (GAU)

PRANJAL BORDOLOY v. STATE OF ASSAM

2014-02-12

A.M.SAPRE, UJJAL BHUYAN

body2014
JUDGMENT A.M. Sapre, J. Heard Mr. A. C. Borbora, learned senior counsel for the petitioners and Mr. D. Saikia, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam, appearing for the respondents. On 06.02.2012 this PIL petition was entertained by passing following order :- “The issue now sought to be raised in this petition by way of public interest litigation is to regulate the exercise of discretion in allowing the use of Judges Field. The State may also indicate how the norms of noise pollution are regulated while granting such permission.” The matter was thereafter taken up on 06.03.2013 when this Court passed the following order :- “On 6.2.2012 following order was passed: “The issue now sought to be raised in this petition by way of Public Interest Litigation is to regulate the exercise of discretion in allowing the use of Judges Field. The State may also indicate how the norms of noise pollution are regulated while granting such permission. List again on 13.3.2013, as prayed.” Mr. DK Mishra, learned senior counsel appearing for the State of Assam points out that order dated 2.2.2013 has been passed by the District Magistrate, Kamrup Metropolitan, Guwahati declaring area shown in the schedule to be “silent zone” under Section 8 of Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Act, 2000. He further points out that there is a decision that the Judges Field may be used for sporting activities only during day time, but the said decision has not been formalized under Article 166 of the Constitution. He further points out that there is a decision that the Judges Field may be used for sporting activities only during day time, but the said decision has not been formalized under Article 166 of the Constitution. Let further steps taken in the matter by the Commissioner and Secretary, Government of Assam, Guwahati Development Department be brought on record on the next date.” We have also perused the affidavit filed by respondent No.3, Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam, Guwahati Development Department, dated 25.05.2012 and consider it apposite to reproduce its relevant paragraph [para 3(f)] herein below: “3(f) That the State of Assam, after spending substantial public money for developing the Judges Field with various sports facilities, and considering same will provide to meet the demand of shortage of playgrounds in the city, and after obtaining the views and approval of Political (A) Department, General Administrative Department, Guwahati Development Department, took a conscious decision to use the said field exclusively for sports activities.” Keeping in view the order dated 06.03.2013 coupled with the statement made in the affidavit quoted supra, we are of the considered opinion that this petition can be closed with a direction to respondents (State authorities)(to ensure compliance of the statements made above in the order dated 06.03.2013 and in the affidavit quoted above, in letter and spirit, for the benefit of public at large. No cost.