Licensor cannot Escape Liability of Noise Pollution by Licensee

The Bhopal Bench of the National Green Tribunal set aside the order passed by Sub-Divisional Magistrate under Madhya Pradesh Kolahal Niyantran Adhiniyam, 1985 (or Adhiniyam or Act) and Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000 (or Noise Rules) wherein the Magistrate warned the Petitioner Trust that the trust shall be held liable in case any person defies Noise Rules by making noise pollution at the trust premises. The Applicant (the trust) was contesting the Sub-divisional Magistrate order before the National Green Tribunal.

The National Green Tribunal set aside this order on account of this order not compiling with the directions of District Collector. The Tribunal observed that District collector while delegating power upon the Sub Divisional Magistrate as provided under Environment Protection act had issued direction notice that shall be issued by Sub-Divisional magistrate in regard to noise pollution shall state specifically the extent of ambient air quality relating to noise as notified by Government of India. The Tribunal said that Sub-Divisional Magistrate while granting license to licensee for using the Applicants premises had specifically mentioned the ambient air quality relating to noise but in the impugned order had not provided anything to show that licensee had violated any condition relating to ambient air quality relating to noise with any particular details. The Tribunal therefore held that in absence of any particulars as to the violation, the applicants or the licensee cannot be made liable for any unspecified act and thereby set aside the order.

The Tribunal also held that both the Licensor (applicant) as being owner of the premises and licensee shall be liable for violating the ambient air quality norms in an event of violation. The Tribunal said that though only contractual relationship exists between the Licensor and licensee wherein the permission is sought by licensees from the authorities in regard to use of public address system but still, both shall be liable as the terms of laws have to read within the terms of contract between the parties in so far as it relates to restriction regarding noise pollution.

The Tribunal said that Adhiniyam and rules contemplates restriction on the use of noise pollution in any place and use of such place is issued in license by licensor and therefore the terms of the act are to be read in the license agreement in so far it relates to restriction in regard to noise pollution and therefore the applicant cannot escape liability by stating that he only let out the premises and have not actually committed noise pollution.

The Tribunal also said that it shall be the responsibility of the licensor to intimate the concerned authorities about any violation of noise rules or directions of Collector by the licensee and should ensure licensee gets prior permission from the prescribed authorities for the use of sound amplifiers before he issues the license to the licensee to use its premises. The tribunal said that the licensor shall be liable to this extent and the principal responsibility shall fall upon the licensee who commits the breach.

The tribunal also held that this legislation of Adhiniyam was not penal legislation like IPC and was not meant primarily to impose punishment but only meant to abate pollution and therefore even if the said act provides for punishment that does lead to the consequence that remedy that is available to the applicant shall be either by way of criminal appeal or revision under CrPc (Criminal Procedure Code). The Tribunal also held that the National Green tribunal has the jurisdiction to try all cases that deal with any substantial question relating to environment as it is provided so by section 14 and section 2 (c) of the National Green Tribunal Act that provides a wide definition of environment that is wide enough to include everything thereby indicating the intension of law makers in giving wide meaning to the terms that are to be interpreted by the Tribunal in respect of environment issues.

The dispute in this case pertained to issuance of the order by sub divisional magistrate to applicant that made the applicant liable for the act of violation of noise rules by any person on its premises. The applicant used to let out premise to people for public function etc.

Law Senate Comment:

The Tribunal through this judgment made it clear that environment laws are aimed to restrict environment pollution and not just punishes the violators that have in –person violated the norms but also those who have any relation to act of causing pollution. The tribunal held that licensor cannot escape the liability simply on the ground that he had let out the premises to the actual violator and has a responsibility under the law to intimate any act of pollution and ensure that necessary permission for the use of amplifiers is prior taken so as to ensure that pollution is avoided. The tribunal said that terms of act should be read in the license agreement.