In a fresh petition today, the government alleged that one of the judges hearing the matter is "biased" against the state government,
Ahead of the Ganesha Chaturthi festival, the Maharashtra Government and the Bombay High Court have locked horns over “silence zones” in the city.
According to the new amended law, the State Government may, according to its discretion, permit use of loud speakers or public address systems and the like during the night hours on or during any cultural, religious or festive occasion.
However, the court on Wednesday refused to accept the state’s stand that there are no silence zones in Mumbai after the Centre’s amendment to the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Controls) Rule.
The state government is, however, firm in its stand. In a fresh petition today, the government alleged that one of the judges hearing the matter is "biased" against the state government, seeking that all matters pertaining to noise pollution rules be transferred to another bench.
"One of the judges is harbouring a serious bias against the state government," the government alleged in its application.
"We are really shocked with the contents of the application. There is specific allegation against me that I am biased against the state government. But we won't get provoked by such allegations," Justice Oka said as reported by PTI.
The bench has now directed the government to approach the Chief Justice and obtain an order on its application immediately.
In what comes out as a power-tussle, the court, said its August 2016 directions on silence zones “continue to operate with all force”. The 2016 judgment in held that areas not less than 100 metres around all hospitals, educational places and courts are deemed silence zones.
“The judgment stands unless it is modified. All directions stand, including the declaration on silence zones,” the bench said on Wednesday as reported LiveLaw.
Advocate general Ashutosh Kumbhakoni, representative of the state, argued that due to this amendment, the direction on deemed silence zones is rendered “ineffective” and does not operate. “When the rules say the state has to declare silence zones, can the court declare silence zones?” he asked.
The rule also suggests that the concerned State Government or District Authority in respect of its jurisdiction as authorised by the concerned State Government shall generally specify in advance, the number and particulars of the days on which such exemption should be operative.