Sachin Kashyap vs Sushil Chandra Srivastava

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).2691 OF 2021 (Arising out of SLP(C) No(s). 24806/2019)

SACHIN KASHYAP & ORS. Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

SUSHIL CHANDRA SRIVASTAVA & ORS. Respondent(s)

WITH

CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).2701 of 2021 @ SLP(C) No. 28742/2019, CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 2692 OF 2021 @ SLP (c) NO.10759/2021 @ Diary No(s). 37221/2019, CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).2693 OF 2021 @ SLP(C) No. 26320/2019, CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).2694 OF 2021 @ SLP(C) No. 28740/2019, CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).2695 OF 2021 @ SLP(C) No. 28741/2019, CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).2696 OF 2021 @ SLP(C) No. 28738/2019, CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).2697 OF 2021 @ SLP(C) No. 28739/2019, CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).2698 OF 2021 @ SLP(C) No. 28534/2019, CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).2699 OF 2021 @ SLP(C) No. 28745/2019, CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).2700 OF 2021 @ SLP(C) No. 29810/2019, CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).2702 OF 2021 @ SLP(C) No. 29809/2019, CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).2703 OF 2021 @ SLP(C) No. 28743/2019, CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).2704 OF 2021 @ SLP(C) No. 29811/2019, CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).2705 OF 2021 @ SLP(C) No. 2139/2020.

O R D E R

Permission to file Special Leave Petition(s) is granted.

Delay condoned.

Intervention/impleadment applications stand allowed.

Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by ASHWANI KUMAR Date: 2021.07.20 Interlocutory Application No. 167927 of 2019 for deleting the 10:18:54 IST Reason:

proforma respondents No. 4 to 11 from the array of the parties

stands allowed at the risk of the appellants.

2 Leave granted.

For the sake of convenience, we are taking up Civil Appeal No.

2691 of 2021 arising out of SLP(C) No.24806/2019 as lead matter and

disposing of all the connected appeals by this common order.

This appeal is filed by non-parties in the Writ Petition who

were, though directly affected, neither impleaded before the High

Court as parties nor was there any prayer for issuance of such

directions by which they are aggrieved.

Brief facts of this case are that respondents No. 1 and 2 had

filed a Writ Petition before the High Court with the following

prayers:-

”(i) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent authority to remove L.C.D. from Hashimpur Chauraha, Prayagraj immediately.

(ii) to issue any other suitable writ, order or direction in the nature as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper to meet the ends of justice under the facts and circumstances of the present case.

(iii) to award cost of writ petition to the petitioners.“

While considering the said prayers, the High Court issued 9

directions in the penultimate paragraph of the judgment dated

20.08.2019.

The appellants are aggrieved by direction No. (iii) issued by

the High Court, which is extracted below:-

“(iii) Under the Rules, 2000, no permission for DJ shall be granted by the authority for the reason that noise generated by DJ is unpleasant and obnoxious level. Even if they are operated at the minimum level of the sound it is beyond 3

permissible limits under the Schedule of the Rules, 2000. A DJ is made up of several amplifiers and joint sound emitted by them is more than thousand dB (A). They are serious threat to human health particularly children, senior citizens and patients admitted in the hospitals.”

The submission of the learned counsel for the appellants is

that in the entire Writ Petition there were neither any pleadings

with regard to the noise generated by the DJ being unpleasant and

of obnoxious level nor there was any such prayer made in the Writ

Petition. The relief granted by the High Court with regard to the

removal of L.C.D. from the particular area in question, which was

a separate issue, and appellants have no grievance regarding the

same. The appellants are only aggrieved by the direction no.(iii)

issued in relation to a matter which was not an issue before the

High Court.

The contention of the learned counsel for the appellants is

that they have a right to play music in public places only after

obtaining license from the District Authority under the relevant

Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000. It is

contended that by imposing such restriction as contained in the

aforesaid direction no.(iii) issued by the High Court, the

livelihood of the appellants is affected and hit by Article 19(1)

(g) of the Constitution of India.

Per contra, learned counsel for the private respondents No. 1

and 2 (Writ Petitioners before the High Court) has submitted that

though there was no such prayer with regard to the playing of

music (DJ) in public place, and the Writ Petition was limited only 4

to playing of L.C.D. in the particular area, yet such directions

could have been issued under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India by expanding the scope of the Writ Petition.

Ms. Garima Prasad, learned Additional Advocate General

appearing for the State of Uttar Pradesh and Ms. Harshita

Raghuvanshi, learned counsel appearing for the Allahabad

Development Authority have submitted that they are duty bound to

comply with the directions issued by the High Court, and in

compliance of the aforesaid direction no.(iii), the State

Government as well as the Allahabad Development Authority are not

permitting the parties to play DJ, except in those cases where the

stay order has been granted by this Court and the parties have

obtained necessary permission.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering

the facts of this case, we are of the clear opinion that since

there were neither pleadings nor any prayer with regard to the

playing of music or DJ in public place, the direction no.(iii) of

the High Court, as quoted herein above with regard to the noise

generated by DJ and restriction on playing music, cannot be

justified in law. The Writ Petition having been filed for a

particular cause and with a particular prayer cannot be expanded

to cover within its ambit all the issues which may be of general

or public importance without there being any pleadings or prayer

with regard to a particular issue. In our view, no such directions

could have been issued, especially in a private litigation which

was not in the nature of Public Interest Litigation. We say so,

particularly, because prior to passing any such order of public 5

importance, the affected parties should be impleaded, at least in

a representative capacity, which is not done in the present case.

The appellants herein are the affected parties who were neither

impleaded nor given any opportunity to present their case.

As such, while quashing the direction no.(iii) in the impugned

judgment of the High Court, as quoted herein above, we make it

clear that the appellants or any other such persons may be

permitted to play the music/DJ only in accordance with law and

after obtaining the requisite license/permission from the

concerned authorities. Ordered accordingly.

With the aforesaid observations, the appeal stands allowed to

the extent indicated above.

In view of the order passed in Civil Appeal No. 2691 of 2021

arising out of SLP(C) No.24806/2019, the other connected appeals

stand allowed, accordingly.

......................J. [VINEET SARAN

......................J. [DINESH MAHESHWARI] NEW DELHI;

JULY 15, 2021.

6

ITEM NO.4 Court 11 (Video Conferencing) SECTION XI

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 24806/2019

(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 20-08-2019 in WC No. 1216/2019 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad)

SACHIN KASHYAP & ORS. Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

SUSHIL CHANDRA SRIVASTAVA & ORS. Respondent(s)

IA No. 166358/2019 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 152274/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 189118/2019 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION IA No. 166360/2019 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT IA No. 152273/2019 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)

WITH SLP(C) No. 28742/2019 (XI)

FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT ON IA 173767/2019 FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ON IA 173769/2019 FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING THE SPARE COPIES ON IA 189139/2019 IA No. 189139/2019 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING THE SPARE COPIES IA No. 173767/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 173769/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.)

Diary No(s). 37221/2019 (XI)

FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN REFILING / CURING THE DEFECTS ON IA 177534/2019 FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT ON IA 177535/2019 FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ON IA 177536/2019 FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING ON IA 189433/2019 IA No. 189433/2019 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING IA No. 177534/2019 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN REFILING / CURING THE DEFECTS IA No. 177535/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 177536/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.) 7

SLP(C) No. 26320/2019 (XI)

IA No. 163837/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 163838/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 163836/2019 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)

SLP(C) No. 28740/2019 (XI)

FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT ON IA 167925/2019 FOR ADDITION / DELETION / MODIFICATION PARTIES ON IA 167927/2019 FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ON IA 167928/2019 FOR impleading party ON IA 167931/2019 FOR INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT ON IA 167931/2019 IA No. 167927/2019 - ADDITION / DELETION / MODIFICATION PARTIES IA No. 167925/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 167928/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 167931/2019 - INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT)

SLP(C) No. 28741/2019 (XI)

FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT ON IA 167860/2019 FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ON IA 167861/2019 FOR impleading party ON IA 167862/2019 FOR INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT ON IA 167862/2019 IA No. 167860/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 167861/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 167862/2019 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT)

SLP(C) No. 28738/2019 (XI) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.170098/2019-ADDITION / DELETION / MODIFICATION PARTIES and IA No.170097/2019-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.170099/2019-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and IA No.170100/2019-INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT and IA No.170096/2019-PERMISSION TO FILE PETITION (SLP/TP/WP/..) IA No. 170098/2019 - ADDITION / DELETION / MODIFICATION PARTIES IA No. 170097/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 170099/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 170100/2019 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT)

SLP(C) No. 28739/2019 (XI)

FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT ON IA 166455/2019 FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ON IA 166456/2019 IA No. 166455/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT 8

IA No. 166456/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.)

SLP(C) No. 28534/2019 (XI)

FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ON IA 176186/2019 IA No. 176186/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.)

SLP(C) No. 28745/2019 (XI)

FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ON IA 181542/2019 FOR impleading party ON IA 181544/2019 FOR INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT ON IA 1Arvind Varma, Sr. Adv. Parul Shukla, Adv.

Ajitesh Soni, Adv.

EC Agra81544/2019 IA No. 181542/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 181544/2019 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT)

SLP(C) No. 29810/2019 (XI)

FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ON IA 185626/2019 IA No. 185626/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.

SLP(C) No. 29809/2019 (XI)

FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES ON IA 179610/2019 FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT ON IA 179611/2019 FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ON IA 179612/2019 IA No. 179611/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 179612/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 179610/2019 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)

SLP(C) No. 28743/2019 (XI)

FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ON IA 179678/2019 IA No. 179678/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.)

SLP(C) No. 29811/2019 (XI)

FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES ON IA 187626/2019 FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT ON IA 187628/2019 IA No. 187628/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 187626/2019 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)

SLP(C) No. 2139/2020 (XI) 9

(IA No.1079/2020-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA No.1080/2020-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and IA No.1078/2020- PERMISSION TO FILE PETITION (SLP/TP/WP/..))

Date : 15-07-2021 These matters were called on for hearing today.

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEET SARAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI

For Parties: Mr. S.R. Singh, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Ankur Yadav, AOR Mr. Prateek Yadav, Adv.

Mr. Krishna Kumar Yadav, Adv.

Mr. Pramod Kumar, Adv.

Mr. Jabar Singh, Adv.

Mr. Arvind Yadav, Adv.

Dr. Amardeep Gaur, Adv.

M/S. V. Maheshwari & Co., AOR

Mr. Shiv Sagar Tiwari, AOR

Mr. Ramjee Pandey, AOR Mr. Raghvendra Shukla, Adv.

Mr. Dhananjaya Kumar Tyagi, Adv.

Mr. Satbir Singh Pillania, Adv.

Mr. Sandiv Kalia, Adv.

Ms. Reena Rao, Adv.

Dr. Sushil Balwada, AOR

Mr. Himanshu Tyagi, AOR

Mr. Amit Wadhwa, Adv.

Mr. Shailesh Singh, Adv.

Mr. Pramod Tiwari, Adv.

Ms. Priyanka Dubey, Adv.

Dr. Vinod Kumar Tewari, AOR

Mr. Fuzail Ahmad Ayyubi, AOR

Mr. Vivek Sarin, Adv.

Mr. Satish C. Kaushik, Adv.

Mr. Aakarshan Aditya, AOR

Mr. Dushyant Parashar, AOR Mr. Dinesh Pandey, Adv.

Mr. Manu Parashar, Adv.

Mr. Amrendra Kumar Singh, Adv.

Mr. Anand Mishra, AOR 10

Ms. Harshita Raghuvanshi, Adv.

Mr. Shashibhushan P. Adgaonkar, AOR

Ms. Garima Prasad, Sr. AAG Mr. Pradeep Misra, AOR Mr. Suraj Singh, Adv.

Mr. Satish Pandey, AOR Mr. Abdul Qadir, Adv.

Mr. Gulfeshan Javed, Adv.

Mr. Gulshan Jahan, Adv.

Ninanda Nair, Adv.

Mr. Arvind Varma, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Parul Shukla, Adv.

Mr. Ajitesh Soni, Adv.

Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR

Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv.

Mr. Ankur Saigal, Adv.

Ms. Parul Shukla, Adv.

Mr. Ajitesh Soni, Adv.

Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R

Permission to file Special Leave Petition(s) is granted.

Delay condoned.

Intervention/impleadment applications stand allowed.

Interlocutory Application No. 167927 of 2019 for deleting the

proforma respondents No. 4 to 11 from the array of the parties

stands allowed at the risk of the appellants.

Leave granted.

The Civil Appeals are allowed in terms of the signed reportable order.

Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of

accordingly.

(ARJUN BISHT) (PRADEEP KUMAR) (ASHWANI THAKUR) (COURT MASTER (SH) (BRANCH OFFICER) AR-CUM-PS 11

(Signed reportable order is placed on the file)