Rabin Mukherjee v. State of West Bengal

Petitioners asked the Calcutta High Court to make the State enforce a rule that banned loud horns on transport vehicles. The Court held the bulb-horn rule mandatory and ordered the State to enforce it within a time limit. It also directed that no fitness certificate be given to a vehicle with a prohibited horn.

Quick Revision

Parties

Rabin Mukherjee and others — petitioners. They moved the writ application for their own rights and in public interest.

State of West Bengal and others — respondents. Mr. Mukul-Prokash Banerjee appeared for the State authorities (para 6).

Procedural History

1. The petitioners filed a writ application in the High Court at Calcutta. They asked for a writ in the nature of Mandamus (an order commanding a public authority to do its duty) directing the respondents to enforce Rule 114 of the Bengal Motor Vehicles Rules, 1940 (para 1).
2. Mr. Saktinath Mukherjee argued for the petitioners and Mr. Mukul-Prokash Banerjee for the State authorities (paras 2, 6).
3. On 5 March 1985 Bhagabati Prasad Banerjee, J. allowed the application. There was no order as to costs (paras 7, 10).

Facts

1. The petitioners moved the writ application for their own rights and in public interest. They complained of nuisance and noise pollution (unwanted sound that harms health) caused by electric and artificially generated air horns on transport vehicles (para 1).
2. The petitioners said the horns were installed and used indiscriminately. They called the noise rash, shrill, loud and alarming (para 1).
3. They said West Bengal is thickly populated and has one of the highest population densities in India. They said the noise level in the Calcutta Metropolitan Area is far above the permissible limit (para 1).
4. They alleged that this excessive noise endangers residents and threatens the health of the weak, infirm and indisposed. They said even normal people find it hard to enjoy rest or carry on their work (para 1).
5. They said the loud and shrill horn is either an electric horn or an air horn. An air horn is mechanically generated and stored in an air tank in most transport vehicles (para 1).
6. They alleged that sudden blowing of such horns gives a rude shock to the human system. They said it affects blood pressure and the mental and nervous system, and breaks concentration (para 1).
7. They said goods transport vehicles in particular operate about 18 hours a day with such horns (para 1).
8. Paragraph 15 of the petition referred to research done jointly by Basu Bijnan Mandir and the Presidency College, Calcutta. It found the environment of Calcutta and its suburbs polluted by indiscriminate noise (para 3).
9. The research found that persons living near the Air Port suffer various ailments and even mental disease. It found that factory workers become deaf or hard of hearing (para 3).
10. The research also found that people suffer loss of appetite, depression, mental restlessness and insomnia. They also suffer excessive blood pressure and heart trouble (para 3).
11. Rule 114(d) required every transport vehicle to be fitted with a bulb horn. The judgment once calls it "Section 114(d)" (para 7). Almost all transport vehicles instead used air horns and electric horns. The Court recorded this as a matter of common knowledge (para 3).
12. The Court noted that Rule 114(d) was observed only in the breach and no transport vehicle owner followed it. No step had been taken by the authorities for the violation (paras 4, 5, 7).
13. The Court noted as common knowledge that transport vehicles blow such horns continuously, even to overtake another vehicle (para 7).

Issues Raised

The order does not frame issues in so many words. The questions it decides are:

1. Is Rule 114(d) of the Bengal Motor Vehicles Rules, 1940 mandatory, so that a transport vehicle may use only a bulb horn?
2. Is it the duty of the respondents to enforce Rule 114(d) against electric, air and other loud and shrill horns?
3. What directions should the Court give to enforce the rule against such large-scale violation?

Arguments Contended

For the petitioners

1. Mr. Saktinath Mukherjee relied on Rule 114 of the Bengal Motor Vehicles Rules, 1940 (para 2).
2. Rule 114(d) requires every transport vehicle to be fitted with a bulb horn. Operators were grossly violating it by using air and electric horns (para 2).
3. These horns produce a shrill and loud noise. They are not necessary for running or operating the vehicles (para 2).
4. The petitioners prayed for a writ in the nature of Mandamus. It would command the respondents to enforce Rule 114 and the restrictions against loud and shrill horns, including air horns (para 1).

For the respondents

1. Mr. Mukul-Prokash Banerjee appeared for the State authorities. He could not dispute that Rule 114(d) is mandatory. He could not dispute that transport vehicles cannot use any horn other than a bulb horn (para 6).
2. The order records no other argument for the respondents.

Court's Reasoning

Bhagabati Prasad Banerjee, J. (sole judge)

1. Noted: The petitioners relied on the research about noise pollution in Calcutta and its suburbs. The Court found it unnecessary to examine the direct effect of the noise (para 3).
2. Noted: It is an admitted position that the indiscriminate and illegal use of electric and air horns is injurious to health. Sound pollution is one of the causes of environmental pollution (harmful change in the surroundings) and is a matter of grave concern (para 3).
3. Noted: Section 2(33) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 says a transport vehicle means a public service vehicle or a goods vehicle (para 4).
4. Noted: Section 2(25) says a public service vehicle means a motor vehicle used or adapted for carrying passengers for hire or reward. It includes a motor cab, contract carriage and stage carriage (para 4).
5. Noted: Section 2(8) says a goods vehicle is a motor vehicle constructed or adapted for carrying goods. It also covers any other motor vehicle when used for carrying goods, alone or with passengers (para 4).
6. Held: Transport vehicles therefore include stage carriages, contract carriages, mini buses, lorries and other transport vehicles. Stage carriages include private buses and State buses (para 4).
7. Held: Rule 114(d) is a mandatory provision. Each transport vehicle can be fitted with no horn other than a bulb horn (para 4).
8. Noted: The mandatory provision is now observed only in the breach. No transport vehicle owner follows it (para 4).
9. Noted: Section 112 of the Motor Vehicles Act punishes contravention of the Act or a rule under it with a fine, if no other penalty is provided. The fine may extend to Rs. 100. For a repeat conviction it may extend to Rs. 300 (para 5).
10. Noted: Transport vehicles are using electric and air horns recklessly. Surprisingly, no steps had been taken by the authorities against this violation of the mandatory rule (para 5).
11. Noted: Counsel for the State could not dispute that Rule 114(d) is mandatory and that only the bulb horn may be used (para 6).
12. Held: Given the facts and the mandatory Rule 114(d), it is the duty of the respondents to enforce the rule. The Court considered the congested State of West Bengal and the effect of sudden horns on blood pressure and the mental and nervous system (para 7).
13. Held: Indiscriminate use of such horns amounts to noise pollution in Calcutta and the congested areas of the State. It harms public health and causes mental restlessness, blood pressure and heart trouble (para 7).
14. Held: It is necessary in the interest of the public at large to stop this noise pollution (para 7).
15. Held: The respondents are under a statutory obligation and duty under Section 112 of the Motor Vehicles Act to punish whoever contravenes Rule 114(d) (para 7).
16. Noted: In spite of that provision, no action was taken against the persons contravening the Rules. Vehicles were allowed to use the prohibited horn (para 7).
17. Why: Use of such horns has increased to an alarming extent. It cannot be checked overnight by starting prosecutions in the usual manner under Section 112 (para 7).
18. Held: The application is allowed. The respondents must strictly enforce Rule 114(d) and the restrictions against electric and other loud and shrill horns, including air horns (para 7).
19. Held: The Court directed the State Government to issue a notice or notification at once. The directions are set out under Judgement (para 7).
20. Held: The State Government must also notify the restriction for vehicles entering West Bengal from other States, so that they are aware of it (para 8).
21. Noted: It is desirable in the larger public interest that the respondents and the State Government take suitable measures to implement Rule 114(d). No certificate of fitness should be granted under Section 38 of the Act in case of non-compliance. The aim is to end this noise pollution early in the State (para 9).
22. Noted: The Court recorded its appreciation of the petitioners for their effort to stop the noise pollution in the larger interest of the people of West Bengal (para 9).
23. Held: No order as to costs (para 10).

Provisions mentioned

• Rule 114(a), Bengal Motor Vehicles Rules, 1940: every motor vehicle must have a horn or approved device for immediate use by the driver. It must give audible and sufficient warning of the approach or position of the vehicle (para 2).
• Rule 114(b): no motor vehicle may have a multitoned horn giving a succession of different notes. No other sound device may give an unduly harsh, shrill, loud or alarming noise (para 2).
• Rule 114(c): sub-rule (b) does not stop the use of approved sound signals on ambulances, fire-fighting or salvage vehicles, police vehicles on duty and similar vehicles (para 2).
• Rule 114(d): every transport vehicle must be fitted with a bulb horn (para 2).
• Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, Section 2(33): a transport vehicle is a public service vehicle or a goods vehicle (para 4).
• Section 2(25): a public service vehicle carries passengers for hire or reward (para 4).
• Section 2(8): a goods vehicle carries goods (para 4).
• Section 112: fine up to Rs. 100 for a first contravention and up to Rs. 300 for a repeat conviction, where no other penalty is provided (para 5).
• Section 38: certificate of fitness. The Court directed that none be given to a vehicle with a prohibited horn (paras 7, 9).

Authorities

• No decided case is cited in the order. The Court decided on the Rules, the Act and the facts as recorded.

Judgement

1. The application is allowed (para 7).
2. The respondents must enforce strictly Rule 114(d) of the Bengal Motor Vehicles Rules, 1940. They must enforce the restrictions against electric and other loud and shrill horns, including air horns, used by vehicle operators (para 7).
3. The State Government must immediately issue a notice or notification to all transport vehicle operators about the restrictions in Rule 114(d). The notice must direct them to remove electric, air and other loud and shrill horns at once and use only the bulb horn in West Bengal (para 7).
4. Operators get 15 days to change the horns and fit bulb horns. The notice must warn that failure to remove the prohibited horns will lead to penal action according to law (para 7).
5. The notice must also say that no certificate of fitness will be given under Section 38 of the Motor Vehicles Act. This applies to any transport vehicle fitted with horns prohibited under Rule 114(d) (para 7).
6. The respondents must take penal action against operators who fail to remove the prohibited horns after the 15 days (para 7).
7. The State Government must give wide publicity to the notice through the press and mass media. Operators must be warned that they are liable to prosecution in accordance with law (para 7).
8. The State Government must also notify the restriction for vehicles entering West Bengal from other States (para 8).
9. The Court said the authorities should take suitable measures to implement Rule 114(d). No certificate of fitness should be granted in case of non-compliance (para 9).
10. There is no order as to costs (para 10).

Legal Principle / Ratio

Rule 114(d) of the Bengal Motor Vehicles Rules, 1940 is mandatory. It is the duty of the respondents to enforce it against loud and shrill horns, and the Court may direct specific enforcement steps. The Court said: "it is the duty of the respondents to enforce the provisions of Rule 114(d)" (para 7).

Obiter: The Court said it is desirable in the larger public interest that no certificate of fitness be granted for non-compliance (para 9).

Critical Analysis

Analysis based on the judgment text.

• The order treats the health effects as admitted. It does not examine the research it mentions (para 3).
• The relief rests on Rule 114(d) and Section 112, and the Court cites no constitutional provision or decided case.
• The Court itself says the penalty under Section 112 is small. It states that prosecution in the usual manner cannot check the problem overnight (para 7).
• The order sets no monitoring step after the 15 days beyond the direction to take penal action.

Significance

• The Court treated noise pollution from vehicle horns as a ground to compel the State to act.
• The order shows a court giving time-bound, practical directions to enforce an existing rule.
• The Notes page on public nuisance in pollution cases lists this case.

Exam-Important Points

• Rule: Rule 114(d) of the Bengal Motor Vehicles Rules, 1940 allows only a bulb horn on a transport vehicle (para 4).
• Directions: The Court ordered a notification, 15 days to change horns, penal action after that, and no fitness certificate under Section 38 (para 7).
• Trap: The State conceded that the rule is mandatory (para 6). The Court said prosecution under Section 112 alone cannot check the violation overnight (para 7).
• Reach: The restriction is also to be notified for vehicles entering from other States (para 8).
• Costs: No order as to costs (para 10).

Prepared from the full text of the judgment. Paragraph numbers follow the judgment text; law reports may number the same paragraph differently.