Omkar Multispeciality Hospital Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

RAGHVENDRAJAT Digitallysigned byRAGHVENDRAJAT

¶3

2026:CGHC:25225

¶4

NAFR

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

WPC No. 2603 of 2026

¶7

1 - Omkar Multispeciality Hospital Chhuiha, Balodabazar Through Its Director Dr. Rabiya Begam, R/o H. No. 62, Kanha Vihar, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.).

¶8

2 - Dr. Rabiya Begam W/o Wasim Raja Aged About 40 Years R/o H. No. 62, Kanha Vihar, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.)

¶9

... Petitioner(s)

¶10

versus

¶11

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Health And Family Welfare Department, Capital Complex, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.).

¶12

2 - Directorate Health Services Chhattisgarh State Nodal Agency Through Project Director, Swasthya Bhawan, Ivth Floor, North Block, Sector 19, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur (C.G.).

¶13

3 - Collector Cum Supervisory Authority District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.).

¶14

4 - Chief Medical And Health Officer Balodabazar-Bhatapara District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.).

¶15

5 - District Nodal Officer Office Of Cmho Balodabazar-Bhatapara District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.).

¶16

6 - Naresh Ghansani President, Press Club Baloda Bazar, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.).

¶17

7 - Dr. Rajesh Kumar Awasthi Aged About 63 Years, Posted As Cmho, Baloda-Bazar Bhatapara, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.).

¶18

... Respondent(s)

¶19

2

¶20

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bhaskar Payashi, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. S.S. Choubey, PL

¶21

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

¶22

Order on Board

¶23

19/06/2026

¶24

By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:-

¶25

“10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ/order or suitable direction to the Respondents to produce complete record in respect of application filed by petitioner for empanelment of the hospital for Ayushman Card scheme, for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court.

¶26

10.2 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order or suitable direction quashing the impugned rejection dated 06.03.2026, passed by Section Officer of NHA and to proceed further in respect of application for empanelment of the petitioner Hospital from the stage reached on 29/01/2026.

¶27

10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order respondent/Authorities or direction suitable to the for immediate empanelment of petitioner hospital under Ayushman Card Yojna,

¶28

3

¶29

since all formalities were completed and only

¶30

empanelment order was supposed to be passed.

¶31

10.4 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other ancillary relief by issuing any other suitable writ, direction or order, deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case including cost of petition as due to passing of illegal and arbitrary rejection application for empanelment for Ayushman Card Scheme on the sole basis of illegal suspension order dated 27/02/2026 which has not been passed in good faith, therefore, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct for payment of cost of petition by Collector in it's personal capacity.”

¶32

Brief facts of the case, is that, the petitioners have filed the present petition challenging the legality and validity of the impugned order dated 06.03.2026 whereby the application submitted by the petitioners for empanelment of their hospital under the Ayushman Card Scheme has been rejected. He submits that the impugned rejection order, uploaded on the web portal of the National Health Authority, records that the petitioners' nursing home licence has been suspended for a period of three months and, therefore, the application submitted on the HEM (Health Engagement Model) Portal has been rejected. He further submits that the rejection is founded solely on the order dated 27.02.2026 passed by the Collector/Supervisory Authority suspending the

¶33

4

¶34

licence of the petitioners' hospital, which is ex facie contrary to the provisions of the Chhattisgarh State Tatha Rogopchar Sambandhit Sthapnayein Anugyapan Adhiniyam, 2010 and the Rules, 2013 framed thereunder. It is contended that under the aforesaid Act and Rules, the District Collector-cum-Supervisory Authority is empowered to suspend or cancel the licence of a hospital only if the hospital has been convicted of an offence under the Act of 2010. Since the petitioners' hospital has never been convicted of any offence under the said Act, the order of suspension itself is without jurisdiction and contrary to law. He further submits that as the impugned suspension order forms the sole basis for rejection of the petitioners' application for empanelment under the Ayushman Card Scheme, the consequential rejection order dated 06.03.2026 is also unsustainable in the eyes of law and deserves to be quashed.

¶35

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that his application for consideration of empanelment was rejected only on the ground that license was suspended. He further submits that the period for suspension of license has already been expired and as such now the petitioners are entitled for empanelment since the application has already been filed before the concerned authorities and as such the concerned authorities may be directed to consider the application.

¶36

5

¶37

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has no objection if such an application has been filed it has been decided by the concerned authorities.

¶38

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶39

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and further taking into account that the sole ground for cancellation of the petitioner’s empanelment under the Ayushman Card Scheme was the suspension of the licence of the petitioner’s Nursing Home, this Court finds that the said period of suspension has admittedly expired. Consequently, the very basis on which the petitioner’s application for empanelment was rejected no longer survives. It is not in dispute that, after expiry of the suspension period, the petitioner’s Nursing Home has been functioning on the strength of a valid and subsisting licence and is presently operating in accordance with law. In such circumstances, the petitioner’s application for empanelment deserves to be reconsidered in the light of the subsequent developments, particularly when the disqualification that formed the foundation of the impugned decision has ceased to exist. This Court is, therefore, of the considered opinion that the competent authorities are required to undertake a fresh consideration of the petitioner’s application for empanelment under the Ayushman Card Scheme by taking into account the fact that the suspension of the licence has already come to an end and that the licence continues to remain valid.

¶40

6

¶41

Accordingly, the impugned order dated 06.03.2026 passed by the Section Officer, National Health Authority (NHA), is hereby quashed and set aside. The respondent authorities are directed to reconsider the petitioner’s application afresh, keeping in view the subsequent developments, particularly the expiry of the period of suspension, which was the sole reason for cancellation of the petitioner’s empanelment under the Ayushman Card Scheme. In the event the petitioner submits a fresh representation/application along with a certified copy of this order within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of this order, the competent respondent authorities shall consider and decide the same strictly in accordance with law by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a further period of thirty (30) days thereafter.

¶42

With this observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶43

Sd/-

¶44

(Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge

¶45

Raghu Jat

Omkar Multispeciality Hospital v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Omkar Multispeciality Hospital v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Adim Jati Sewa Sahkari Samiti Maryadit, Kibaibalenga Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vijay Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ramadhar Patel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Santosh Kumar @ Santosh Dewangan Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Narmada Prasad Patel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ajay Kumar Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh