AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
R. Rajendra Babu, J.—The 8th respondent was running a Cinema Talkies in the name "Aradhana Talkies" in Ward No. III of Villiappally Panchayath. The petitioners who are residing close to the above cinema talkies filed this original petition for directing the respondents 1 to 7 to stop the functioning of the above talkies and to take immediate steps to implement Exts. P4, P8 and P10 and to punish the 8th respondent in accordance with the relevant provisions of law.
The allegations in the petition briefly are as follows:
The 8th respondent started a cinema talkies by name "Aradhana Talkies". The 8th respondent had made basic changes to the sound system resulting intense sound causing pollution and annoyance to the petitioners and other residents of their houses. The sound from the above cinema talkies was causing nuisance to the surrounding public also as the sound emanating was in excess of the prescribed limits. Recently the 8th respondent had changed the location of the urinal and made it close to the house of the petitioners and the same was causing annoyance and pollution, and that the sound emanating from the generator also was causing annoyance to them. Petitioner had a further case that the location of the generator had been shifted without obtaining proper sanction from the competent authorities and it was installed very close to the residence of the petitioners there by the petitioners were put to much hardships. The 8th respondent had not complied with the directions issued by the competent authorities and there by action has to be taken against the 8th respondent for violation of the directions and that the functioning of the talkies also should be stopped.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the Panchayath the 8th respondent, the Standing Counsel for the Pollution Control Board and also the learned Government Pleader.
Admittedly, the 8th respondent had started functioning of a cinema talkies as early as in 1980. By the advancement of the technology in the field of cinema, it is quite natural that the 8th respondent also will have to adopt the advanced technologies. It appears that he had to make some modification to the sound system when the films were produced adopting modern advanced technology. It is quite natural that the owner of the talkies also will have to adopt necessary modifications in accordance with the advanced technologies to meet the needs of the day. The 8th respondent also made certain modifications in the sound system. The talkies is situated in a remote village. No one can expect that a person will invest very huge amount for constructing a modern cinema theatre, at a remote place, that too when the cinema industry is going down. It is common knowledge that several talkies had been closed down as it was found unviable or uneconomic due to the invasion of the Television and cable system. hence, it is not possible to accept the case put forward by the petitioners that the 8th respondent should convert the talkies to a modern theatre avoiding emission of sound outside the theatre. Being an old talkies, it is quiet natural that there will be emission of sound outside the talkies. But the environmental engineer who inspected the premises did not report that there was emission of sound beyond the prescribed limits and there was pollution of sound as a result of the functioning of the talkies.
The main grievance appears to be the use of the generator. As a result of the load-shedding for half an hour, the 8th respondent was compelled to purchase a generator and to install the same for continuing the show without break as result of the load shedding. It is common knowledge that due to the power shortage, the Kerala State Electricity Board has adopted load-shedding for half an hour. No one can expect that during the period of load-shedding the customers should remain inside the talkies till the power supply was restored. It would be advantageous to the customers when the theatre authorities install a generator to continue the show. The petitioners have no case that the entire functioning of the theatre is using the generator. The evidence on record would reveal that the generator was being used only during the lack of power supply. The use of the generator or a short span of time cannot be said to be a very great nuisance caused to the nearby residents when we compare the inconvenience caused to the audience or customers in the theatre, if they are detained in the theatre or the whole period of load-shedding without any light and fan inside the theatre. The mischief caused by the use of the generator would be negligible when we compare the inconvenience caused to the audience sitting inside the theatre.
The authorities of the Pollution Control Board visited the talkies and issued certain directions as evident from Ext.P8. Ext.P8 would reveal that the generator should be shifted and installed at the location as directed by the Panchayath, that a compound wall will have to be constructed and that necessary control measures should be provided for bringing down the intensity of the sound pollution. The learned counsel for the 8th respondent submitted that all the above directions issued by the Pollution Control Board had been complied with. The Panchayath authorities also issued certain directions as evident from Ext.P4 and those directions also had been complied with as evident from Ext.R8(k). It appears from the counter filed by the 8th respondent that the ladies toilet had been shifted from its original position considering the inconvenience caused to the ladies. Sufficient precautions should be taken by the 8th respondent to see that the pollution from the above toilet is minimized. Ext.R8(c) would reveal that the construction of a toilet to the ladies is in progress. It appears that all the directions issued by the competent authorities had been complied with. Even if anything to be complied with the panchayath authorities should make a consistent watch on the functioning of the talkies and to see that all directions issued for avoiding the pollution are complied with. The pollution as a result of the working of the generator should be minimized by directing the 8th respondent to comply with the directions issued by the Pollution Control Board.
On a consideration of all the circumstances, I do not think that the relief prayed for by the petitioners can be allowed. I find no reasons to direct the 8th respondent to close down the talkies. Most of the directions issued by the authorities had already been complied with. Yet the Panchayath should supervise and control the functioning of the theatre minimizing the inconvenience caused to the public and the nearby residents. The Panchayath authorities should inspect the talkies and see that the direction issued by the Pollution Control Board are complied with strictly and if it is not complied with, appropriate action will have to be taken. With the above direction, this original petition has only to be closed and it is closed accordingly.