mecconcrehan

By way of that order, the high court had already brought construction activity under noise pollution and restricted construction work between 10pm and 6am.The court was hearing a petition filed by Cuffe Parade resident Robin Jaisinghani about violation of noise pollution control norms and that the HC had restrained the MMRC from carrying out construction work beyond 10 p.

Advocate Zal construction anchor Andhyarujina said that the high court had passed detailed order on a bunch of PILs pertaining to noise pollution caused during festivals and by vehicle honking, construction activity and loudspeakers at religious places.Mumbai: An advocate has been appointed to help the Bombay high court in the ongoing dispute over metro construction and alleged violation of noise norms by the MMRC..S. The actual situation is much different. On Tuesday, advocate Andhyarujina told a bench of Justices A.""Therefore, the MMRC must not be exempted from provisions of the Environment Protection Act, or the Noise Pollution Rules 2000, only because it is the metro work in question here," he said.Advocate Andhyarujina said.

"The visit to the construction sites in and around Cuffe Parade area revealed that the claims made by the Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation (MMRC) about implementing noise norms did not hold water. Oka and R.Hence, relief should not be given to MMRC in this case. Chagla that he, along with advocate general Ashutosh Kumbhakoni who was representing the state in the case, had recently visited the metro 3 site and found that noise norms were not being strictly adhered to