Secretary to the Government of India,
Ministry of Environment and Forests,
CGO Complex, Lodhi Road,
New Delhi 110 003.
Mr. R. N. Jindal,
Additional Director (CP Division),
Room No. 556, Paryavaran Bhawan,
New Delhi – 11510
E-mail: envisect@nic.in
cc: Sumaira Abdulali - AWAAZ Foundation, E-mail: sumairaabdulali@yahoo.com
cc: Mr. Jairam Ramesh, E-mail: Jairam@vsnl.com
Subj: Amendment notification to Noise Pollution (Regulation & Control) Rules 2000
Dear Mr. Sharma & Mr. Jindal,
I am a resident of rural Uttara Kannada District, Karnataka. I have read the "Supreme Court on Noise" authored by Messrs. R. C. Lahoti & Ashok Bhan.
A friend of mine in Mumbai bemoaned the fact that enforcement of these guidelines have resulted in the demise of many outdoor cultural events, while political and religious infractions are rampant. In rural India, blaring speakers, Air Horns, loud noise made when locking and unlocking vehicles and the jingle of reversing vehicles are major sources of Noise Pollution that are constant – day & night.
Earlier this year I visited Kerala and was aghast at the volume of music emanating from temples. The daily call of the Mullah over the PA system is another issue.
Below are my comments:
Establishing norms that portray India as a Developed Country:
India is maturing and is a major economic power in this region. Economic growth will lift more people out of poverty and enable them to enjoy a better Quality of Life. We must prepare for the future and establish norms that reflect that of a Developed Nation.
Establishing a consistent set of norms that meets the “common denominator” expectations of all citizens for day-to-day life, is easily established. It is the exceptions that are contentious.
Accommodating India’s rich cultural heritage while embracing the future:
The biggest challenge is to maintain India's rich cultural and religious diversity and improve the Quality of Life of all citizens. In addition, conformity should be instituted and applied throughout India with no exceptions.
In maintaining cultural and religious heritage, I recommend norms that were prevalent at the dawn of religion and culture. There were no electrical devices then. However, it is suggested that exceptions be made for specific religious functions as noted below.
Two sets of norms recommended – Daily 24x7 norms and exceptions:
As indicated earlier, a “common denominator” set of guidelines should be established that has 24x7 applicability. This set of norms is devoid of any cultural, political, social or religious bias.
A second set of guidelines should be set up to address the needs of society and would relax the 24x7 norms. Activities that would be heard by the public, that involve noise over a pre-determined level should require permission and a pay for privilege fee. This would constitute a revenue stream.
Issues commented on:
- The biggest issue is loud speakers (including noise emanating outdoors from the indoor use of speakers) at marriage, cultural, social, political and religious functions.
- Excessive noise producing instruments and equipment
- Fire crackers
- Cultural Music events
- Enforcement
Loudspeakers:
A common set of rules should apply to all. There should be no differentiation between faith, state and civil issues.
Permission for the use of loudspeakers within acceptable guidelines and timings for Public Meetings, Marriages, Social/Entertainment functions and Religious Discourses, etc. should be available for a fee.
Excessive Noise:
Construction in populated areas should be limited between 8AM and 6PM. Exceptions should be made for pouring concrete at night in populated areas and should require permission.
The use of excessive noise producing instruments like drums and tom toms is another contentious issue. Playing of music through portable PA Systems is now common during processions, like during Ganesh Chaturti. A pay for privilege scheme should be established wherein a fee structure is established depending upon instruments used and the size of the processions. A simple procession during established festivals should require no permission.
Clanging noise made during certain Puja’s such as Krishna Jayanti and House Warming should be allowed using conches, and bells/chimes that have predefined audio characteristics.
The use of personal audio devices on speakers (like mobile phones) in shared public transport vehicles should be banned. Use should be restricted to listening via ear phones. Use of loud ring-tones should also be discouraged. Needless to say, the use of blaring air horns and reversing jingles should be banned. Vehicle and ancillary manufacturers should be required to install muted beeps that signal opening/closing of doors and vehicle reversing.
Fire Crackers:
This is a sensitive issue indeed. Traditionally, it is part of Diwali and Tulsi Puja celebrations that take place in close proximity of each other. Lately, it is becoming part of New Year, Independence Day, Republic Day, marriages and entertainment events (like IPL). In keeping with traditions, one set of noise guidelines should be established to govern the use of fire-crackers (slightly more relaxed to accommodate noise making crackers) on specific days during the Diwali and Tulsi Puja period. Another set of noise guidelines should be established for emerging norms, like for Independence Day, Republic Day and New Years.
All other events should fall under the pay for privilege guidelines. If a party wants to burst crackers during a marriage procession, they ought to acquire permission for the size of procession, instruments involved and fire-crackers and pay the appropriate fee.
Cultural Music Events:
India has a rich heritage of Folk & Classical music. Use of loud speakers at these functions should be governed by the noise guidelines. However, use of acoustic instruments and limited percussion instruments should be permitted into the night at festivals and concerts.
Enforcement:
Finally, these guidelines don’t serve any purpose if they are not enforced and are flagrantly violated. And as indicated earlier, they should be consistent across the country. However, India is a diverse society and it is possible that a set of rules that works for one region is too restrictive for another. Multi-religious, multi-ethnic body should be appointed that recommends exceptions that can be bubbled up to the National Level. This is a people’s issue and people should be actively encouraged to take part in the formulation of these guidelines through a constant process of dialog.
Regards,
