East Jakarta Residents Sue Over Noisy Padel Court, Take Case to Administrative Court

Residents of the Pulomas area in East Jakarta have complained about noise and heavy vehicle traffic caused by a padel court operating within their housing estate. The complaints have escalated to a lawsuit filed at the Jakarta Administrative Court (PTUN).

A resident named Mutia (45) explained that the site originally comprised two houses that were demolished around June 2024. Residents initially assumed a private tennis court would be built there.

“At first we thought it was going to be a private tennis court, because the owner’s house is just behind it. So we had no objections. But by the end of October it became very busy — there were flower wreaths, lots of cars. That’s when we realised it was a commercial operation,” Mutia said when met in the Pulomas area of East Jakarta on Saturday (21 February 2026).

According to her, the padel court operates from 06:00 to 22:00 Western Indonesian Time. On any given day, two courts are used in rotation for hours on end.

“Just imagine — 16 hours of operation, two courts. More than 100 cars could be coming and going each day. We only have one access point, so they all pass right in front of our homes,” she said.

Residents said they had attempted mediation with the facility’s management on several occasions. They requested reduced operating hours, the installation of sound insulation, and vehicle parking arrangements that would keep cars outside the residential complex.

“We simply asked them to shorten the hours, install soundproofing to reduce the noise, and park outside the security gate. But to this day there has been no significant change,” she said.

Beyond the noise from gameplay, residents also complained about certain events reportedly running late into the night. She added that a bazaar and vehicle test-drive event had been held on the premises without residents’ knowledge.

“This is a residential neighbourhood. Children play here, people come and go from their homes. Suddenly it’s crowded, cars are speeding through. We just want to live peacefully in our own homes,” she said.

Residents said they had raised complaints through various channels, from the neighbourhood and sub-district levels up to relevant government agencies. However, the padel court’s operations have reportedly continued unabated.

Mutia also said she had pursued multiple complaint avenues, from the JAKI municipal services application to writing letters to City Hall, before ultimately filing suit at the Administrative Court.

“We tried going through JAKI. Initially the response was that no building approval (PBG) or business identification number (NIB) could be found. But two days later we were told the permits were already in place. We were completely confused,” she said.

Dissatisfied with this response, residents then wrote to a number of agencies, including the One-Stop Integrated Service office (PTSP), relevant departments, and DKI Jakarta City Hall. Through this process, they obtained copies of the permit documents.

“When we examined them, the building area stated in the PBG did not match the actual conditions on the ground. That raised serious questions for us,” she said.

Residents then visited various government offices seeking clarification. They also lodged complaints with the DKI Jakarta Regional Legislative Council (DPRD) and the Ombudsman. However, according to the residents, no concrete solution was forthcoming.

“We’ve been through mediation several times. Our hope is for action in accordance with the regulations, not just another round of mediation,” she said.

Residents File Suit at Jakarta Administrative Court

The residents ultimately filed their lawsuit at the Jakarta Administrative Court at the end of June 2025. The suit was directed at the East Jakarta Mayor as the party that issued the Building Approval (PBG), with the padel court owner named as an intervening defendant.

During court proceedings, residents said they discovered that warning letters and even a demolition order had previously been issued by the relevant department. However, the building had reportedly not been demolished.

“If warning letters and a demolition order have already been issued, why haven’t they been enforced? That’s what baffles us,” she added.

Mutia said the residents’ lawsuit was accepted by the Jakarta Administrative Court. However, the ruling is currently being appealed by both the owner and the East Jakarta municipal government.