Disposed

Bhole Shanker Verma v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC26 Jul 2019WRIC/24457/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged a show cause notice regarding clinic registration via a writ. The bench held the petition premature as no final order had been passed and directed the authority to dispose of the matter within 30 days imparting an opportunity of hearing. Petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent authority to dispose of the show cause notice within 30 days after giving an opportunity of hearing.

Bhole Shanker Verma Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 32

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 24457 of 2019 Petitioner :- Bhole Shanker Verma Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Kumar Srivastav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶3

Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J. Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

¶4

The writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs :-

¶5

"(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned notice dated 14.6.2019 issued by the respondent no.4 i.e. Annexure No.3 to the writ petition.

¶6

(ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere in peaceful medical practice of the petitioner having clinic in Prakash Nagar Nunihai, Police Station Etmaddaula, district Agra otherwise the petitioner shall suffer irreparable loss and injury."

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after passing the Bachelor degree of Medicine in Electro Homoeopathy and Surgery, petitioner has been registered in Council of Electro Homoeopathy Medicine Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow. Thereafter, following the procedure prescribed under the law, petitioner has started practice as doctor by opening training in Agra and during this period, respondent no.4 - Nodal Officer, Agra has issued show cause notice dated 14.6.2019 to the petitioner on the ground that petitioner's clinic is not registered with the office of C.M.O. Agra. In reply, petitioner has categorically denied the allegations made in the notice dated 14.6.2019.

¶8

A perusal of the record shows that petitioner has already filed his reply to the impugned show cause notice and decision upon it has not been taken by respondent no.4. Since no final order has yet been passed after the filing of the reply by the petitioner, the petition appears to be premature.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without going into the merits of the case, we direct the respondent no.4/concerned authority to dispose of the matter, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the parties.

¶10

It is made clear that this Court has not yet expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the authority concerned shall decide the matter on its own merits.

¶11

With the aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed of .

¶12

Order Date :- 26.7.2019/Rishabh

Bhole Shanker Verma v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhole Shanker Verma v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saraswati Devi Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

New Metro Hospital and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ranveer Singh Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Neelam Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Arvind Pathak Vs State of U P and 6 Others

Nisha Vs State of U P and 5 Others