Over 3,000 loudspeakers removed from public places for violation of norms: UP Police
Lucknow, Nov 27: Over 3,000 loudspeakers or sound amplifiers installed at public and religious places in Uttar Pradesh were found to be violating prescribed norms, and were removed on Monday, a senior official said.
As part of a month-long campaign against loudspeakers, 61,399 loud speakers were checked from 5 am to 7 am in all the districts on Monday, the official said.
The campaign is being carried out in accordance with directives of the state government between November 23 to December 23.
In a statement, Special Director General of Police (Law and Order) Prashant Kumar said 3,238 loudspeakers or sound amplifiers operating against the norms or beyond the prescribed decibel limit were removed from public or religious places.
The DGP said decibel limit of 7,288 loudspeakers or amplifiers were reduced to bring it at par with the norms.
Kumar said that people violating the noise limit set by the police were given a notice warning them of strict action for any future violations.
Last year in April, the state government had launched a large-scale campaign to remove loudspeakers from religious places. After the campaign, in a review meeting of Jhansi division on May 7, Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath had said more than a lakh loudspeakers were removed in the state.
The chief minister had directed officials to ensure that the removed loudspeakers are not reinstalled.
The statement does not specify the sound limit for loud speakers or sound amplifiers installed at public and religious places.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Liberal approach must be adopted while considering disability pension to army men: SC
New Delhi (PTI): Observing that a liberal approach must be adopted while construing beneficial provisions, the Supreme Court has granted disability pension to an army man who was relieved from the service as he was suffering from "Schizophrenia."
The top court noted that the decision of the authority to discharge a serviceman is based on a medical report which is devoid of reasons.
A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and N Kotiswar Singh said the requirement to give reasons by the Medical Board is crucial, critical, decisive and necessary for granting or denying disability pension.
The apex court said it is not a mere formality, but a necessary material based on which the pension sanctioning authority has to decide about the grant or refusal of disability pension.
"Accordingly, in our opinion, if the serviceman is discharged from service or denied the disability pension on the basis of a medical opinion which is devoid of reasons, it would strike at the root of the action taken by the authority, and such action cannot be sustained in law.
"We, therefore, hold that if any action is taken by the authority for the discharge of a serviceman and the serviceman is denied disability pension on the basis of a report of the Medical Board wherein no reasons have been disclosed for the opinion so given, such an action of the authority will be unsustainable in law," the bench said in its judgement dated May 7 which was uploaded today.
The top court was hearing a plea filed by an army man challenging an order passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Kochi, by which the appellant's claim for grant of disability pension was denied.
The petitioner was enrolled in the Indian Army on November 17, 1988, as a sepoy, and after serving more than nine years, he was discharged from service on being diagnosed with Schizophrenia.
His discharge on medical invalidation was based on the opinion of the Invalidating Medical Board held on March 30, 1998, at the Command Hospital, Western Command, Chandimandir which found that the onset of the invalidating disease was in August 1993 during which period the appellant had served in a peace station and that the disability was neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service and the said disease of the appellant was constitutional in nature and not connected with the service.
In its judgement, the top court said a much more liberal view needs to be adopted while dealing with the cases of discharge of servicemen from service on account of suffering from Schizophrenia as they may face several impediments and difficulties in proving the causal connection of the said disease with the military service.
"We must appreciate the fact that the provisions for grant of disability pension are in the nature of a beneficial scheme intended to provide succour to servicemen in hard times who have been discharged from service after having served the nation with dedication. Accordingly, a liberal approach must be adopted while construing such beneficial provisions," the bench said.
The apex court said in cases where the serviceman himself has not applied for discharge but has been discharged by the authority, the onus of proving the disability and grounds for denying the disability pension would lie heavily on the authority.
"Since it is the statutory requirement that the opinion of the Medical Board is to be the basis of the discharge, in our view, if the opinion of Medical Board is devoid of reasons, the act of the authority based on mere opinion sans reasons can certainly be questioned.
"According to us, if the decision of the authority to discharge a serviceman is based on a medical report which is devoid of reasons, which are required to be given as also mandated by rules as discussed above, such an act of the authority specially when it denies any post discharge benefit will be rendered invalid in the eyes of law," the bench said.
The court said it has noted that in the entire original record produced, there is no material for concluding that the appellant was suffering from Schizophrenia, which is in the nature of a constitutional personal disorder.
"Accordingly, we hold that the order of discharge of the appellant and denial of disability pension to him based on a medical opinion without providing full reasons to support the opinion cannot be said to be valid.
"The question which would arise for consideration now is whether we should remit the matter to the Medical Board at this stage for reconsideration in the light of our observations made above. We, however, feel that adopting the aforesaid course of action at this stage after about 27 years of the appellant being invalided from service on May 18, 1998, would not be in the interest of justice," the bench said.
The top court refused to disturb the order of discharge of the army man on the ground of medical invalidity due to Schizophrenia, but directed the authorities that he be granted disability pension with immediate effect with all attending benefits, as per rules.
However, the appellant will not be entitled to any arrears of invalid pension, except for the last three years, it said.
