3. Normal speech audible 20 feet.
Whisper 3-4 feet.
Beginning of shift and end of shift 10 db deficient.
NIHL – Earliest changes at 4000 Hz.
NHIL – Important frequency is 4000Hz.
Occupational importance 4000 Hz.
Speech zone frequency is 500 – 2000 Hz.
High zone frequency is 3000 – 8000 Hz.
Speech frequency is affected later .
More than 4000 Hz. Frequency cell excess damage.
2000 – will damage.
3000 – can cell damage.
6000 – cells escp
Dip indicate of NIHL.
4. Legal Requirement
As per factory Act 1948 in every factory suitable
engineering control or administration measures should
be taken to protect workers from being exposed to
sound levels exceeding the maximum permissible
limits. The permissible exposure in the case of
continuous or impulsive (impact ) noises are as given
below.
Noise :
a) Auditory ill effects - Temporary hearing loss &
Permanent hearing loss.
b) Non Auditory ill effects - Speech interference,
Variation in blood pressure, Dilation of pupil, Disease
like peripheral vascular disturbance, Vascular
neuropathy, myopathy etc.
5. Permissible exposure in case of continuous noise
Total time exposure ( continuous or a
number of short term exposure )
Sound pressure level in decibels per
day in hours
8 90
6 92
4 95
3 97
2 100
1 ½ 102
1 105
¾ 107
½ 110
¼ 115
No exposure in excess of 115 db is to be permitted.
For any period of exposure falling in between any figure and the next higher or lower
figure as indicated in column above permissible sound pressure level is to be
determined by extrapolation on a proportionate basis.
Duration per day, Hours slow
response
dBA
8 90
6 92
4 95
3 97
2 100
1 1/2 102
1 105
½ 110
1/4 115
Permissible noise exposure
No exposure in excess of 115 dBA is to be permitted
For any period of exposure falling in between any figures and next higher
or lower figure as indicated in the column above, permissible sound pressure
Level is to be extrapolation on a proportionate basis
6. Other legislations dealing with noise
pollution
• Amendment brought to Air act 1981 in 1987specifically
extended the provisions of the Air act including increased
penalties and the issuance of injunction by magistrate to noise
pollution. The definition of Air pollution is expanded to include
noise
• Apart from the above other central Govt statues like M V act,
Railways act, The aircraft act, F Act contain provisions to tackle
noise pollution
• Local Municipal legislations and the Police act also regulates
certain activities the create noise
• Rules framed by certain states eg, Bihar, Orissa, Delhi etc,
regulates use of horn and need for adopting silencers
7. Objective of the Rules
• To regulate and control noise producing
and generating sources with the object
of maintaining the ambient air quality
standard in respect of noise
8. Noise Pollution (regulation and control) Rules
2000
• 8 Rules and one schedule
Rule 1 : Short title and commencement
Rule 2 : definitions
Rule 3 : Ambient air quality standards in respect of different area/
zones
Rule 4 : Responsibilities as to enforcement of Noise pollution control measures
Rule 5 : Restrictions on the use of loud speakers/ Public address system
Rule 6 : Consequences of any violation in silence zone/ area
Rule 7 : Complaints to be made to the authorities
Rule 8 : Power too prohibit etc. continuance of music sound or noise
Schedule : ambient air quality standards in respect of noise
9. Classification of zones under the rules
1. Industrial Zone
2. Residential Zone
3. Commercial Zone
4. Silent Zone
10. Noise Pollution (Regulation & Control) Rules, 2000
Area
code
Category of
Area/zone
Limits in dB(A) Leq
Day-time Night-time
(A) Industrial Area 75 70
(B) Commercial
Area
65 55
(C) Residential
Area
55 45
(D) Silence Zone 50 40
11. • Section 5 -Restriction on use of loudspeaker
and other public address system
• Rule 7- Complaint to the authority
• Rule 6- Penalty for violation
12. Silence zones
• The rule defines 100 meters surrounding hospitals,
educational institutions and court as a silence area and
impose penalty for doing the following acts
1. Playing music or sound amplifiers
2. Beating drums or tom-tom or blowing horn either musical
or pressure or trumpet or beating or soundings any
instrument
3. Exhibiting any mimetic, musical or other performances to
attract crowd
Rule is silent on dos and don’ts in industrial, commercial and
residential areas and the punishment in case of violations
13. • Right to Religious practices
v.
Right to clean and Healthy Environment
• Church of God (Full Gospel) in India V K.K.R.M.C. Welfare
Association 2000 SCC 282
Minority institution, during its prayer services, made use of
drums and loudspeakers in the early hours of morning.
14. • In Dhannlal V Chittar Singh case: the court issued
injunction restraining the defendant from operating
a floor mill close to the plaintiff's house on grounds
of noise pollution. The court deduced the principle
governing the nuisance caused by constant noise
• However, in case of Ram Ratan V Munna Lal, the
addition of two power looms in the locality where
several such loomshad already been working, was
held to be any serious addition to the existing noise.
15. State of Bombay v Narasu Appa Mali AIR 1952 Bom.
82
• Ganesh and Navratri festivals and the use of
loudspeakers during night.
• Court orders the strict implementation of
Environmental Acts
• Nobody can object on celebration of festivals,
but their means of celebration must not
disturb the peace and tranquility of the
neighborhood.
16. P. A Jacob v Superintendent of Police, 1996,
Bom
• Fundamental right to freedom of speech
guaranteed under Art. 19(1)(a) did not include
the right to use a loudspeaker.
• But this right cannot be restricted absolutely
without justification and reasonable cause,
and any activity within reasonable limits
should be allowed as a matter of reasonable
exercise of right.
17. NOISE POLLUTION and FIRE WORKS
• Free Legal Aid Cell v. Government of NCT of Delhi AIR 2001
Delhi 455
The Hon'ble court directed that:
1. Separate courts regarding noise pollution may be
established
2. All District Magistrates should be empowered to issues
prohibitory orders under sec. 144 of Cr.P.C to limit the
hours for the use of loudspeakers.
3. Use of firecrackers in religious festivals, marriages,
processions etc., shall be properly regulated
4. It shall be the duty of the area SDM's to see that Noise
Control Rules are strictly adhered to and any default in this
regard will be treated as misconduct, liable for disciplinary
action besides action for disobeying court's order.
18. GIDC Housing Association v State of Gujarat 1997 Guj.
221
• Writ petition by residents complaining about
noise pollution caused by an Iron and steel
factory.
• Since the housing colony was within the Industrial
estate and was established after the factory,
• The court held that the residents had come to the
place of nuisance, hence cannot complain.
• The Company on the other hand should stick to
standards for noise emission u/EPA
19. Health-Marriage hall, hospitals and use of loudspeakers
• Sayeed Maqsood Ali v The State of M. P AIR
2001 MP 220
• Cardiac patient, near an Eye Hospital and by the side of a
Dharmashala.
• In the vicinity of the petitioners house there are hospitals and
educational institutions and Government Higher Secondary school.
• The Dharmashala run by the State, accommodates various
categories of people and many a religious function are held
throughout the year. The Dharmashala also is given on rent for
the purpose of holding marriages and other functions. In the
Dharmashala, loudspeakers are utilized where music is played at a
very high pitch creating disturbance to the petitioner and other
persons residing in the said locality.
20. Noise pollution (regulation and Control) Amendment
Rules 2002
• New provision added in 2002 giving power to the concerned
authority to permit use of loud speaker or public address
systems during night hours (10 pm to 12 midnight)on or
during any cultural or religious festivals for a period not
exceeding 15 days in all during a calendar year.
• Validity of this Amendment was challenged in the Kerala HC
• After dismissal of the same by HC in Kerala, the aggrieved
petitioner appealed in before the Supreme Court of India
• Noise interferes with the fundamental right of citizens live in
peace and to protect themselves with the forced audience
thus is violative of Article 21 of the constitution
21. Supreme Court’s verdict
• ‘Having look in to the diversity of culture and religion in India, we think
that a limited power of exemption from the operation of the the Noise
rules granted by the central government in exercise of its statutory powers
cannot be held to be unreasonable. The power to grant exemption is
conferred on the State Government. It cannot be further delegated. The
power shall be exercised by reference to the State as a unit and not by
reference to District, so as to specify different dates for different districts’
• It can be reasonably expected that the State government would exercise
the power with due care and caution and in public interest.
• Further under the impugned Rule there is no scope provided to the State
Government to widened the exemption either by increasing the number
of days or increasing the duration beyond 2 hours
• The State government to specify in advance the number and particulars of
days on which the exemption is operative
• The exemption when granted shall not apply to silence zones.
