Disposed

Kameshwar Prasad v. Health

Jharkhand HC22 Feb 2018WPC/3069/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment dismisses a PIL concerning the non-operation of a CT Scan machine at a government hospital. The court held that criminal proceedings and blacklisting of the private firm were already underway and directed the petitioner to approach the competent health authority for operational directions. The petition was disposed of with liberty to approach the department.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to approach competent authority/Respondent No. 2 with representations and documents if the CT Scan operation has not started.

Kameshwar Prasad Vs Health — Service and Employment | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P. (PIL) No. 3069 of 2015

¶3

Kameshwar Prasad -----Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand

¶6

Secretary, Department of Health, Family Welfare

¶7

and Medical Education Government of Jharkhand

¶8

Director in Chief, Health Services, Directorate of Health Services, Government of Jharkhand

¶9

Deputy Commissioner, Palamau

¶10

Civil Surgeon cum Chief Medical Officer, Palamau

¶11

In-Charge, Diagnostic Centre, Sadar Hospital, Medininagar, Palamau

¶12

M/s Records and Medicare System Private Limited, Chandigarh

¶13

A.G.M. (Sales), M/s Records and Medicare System Private Limited, Chandigarh ----- Respondents

¶14

¶15

CORAM: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ratnaker Bhengra

¶16

For the Petitioner: Mr. J.S. Singh, Advocate For the Resp-State: Mr. Rajeev Ranjan Mishra, GP-II

¶17

¶18

05/ 22.02.2018 There are several surviving defects to be removed in the matter which

¶19

is pending since July 2015, though twice time was granted earlier for the said purpose.

¶20

Petitioner sought a direction for starting operation of C.T. Scan Machine at Diagnostic Centre at Medininagar, Palamau which have been installed by M/s Records and Medicare System Private Limited, Chandigarh.

¶21

A counter affidavit has been filed by the Respondent State. According to the learned counsel for the State, since the machine was not made operational by the Firm, notices were issued upon it to show cause and thereafter, the Department of Health, Medical Education and Family Welfare, Government of Jharkhand had instructed the Civil Surgeon, Palamau to lodge criminal case under the relevant provisions of Indian Penal Code against the Company for having indulged in cheating and fraud. Proceedings have at the same time, been initiated for recovery of the legal debt of Rs. 1,68,94,801/under Public Demand Recovery Act in Certificate Case No. 1887/2017-18

¶22

¶23

before the Court of District Certificate Officer, Palamau. The Firm has also been blacklisted by order dated 28.10.2017.

¶24

Learned counsel for the State submits that all legal action has been taken against the Firm. Start of operation of C.T. Scanning in the Diagnostic Centrel, Sadar Hospital, Medininagar, Palamu is a matter which is within the cognizance of the authorities of the Health Department. If the petitioner still has the grievance in relation to the operation of C.T. Scan Machine, he may approach the competent authority under the Department of Health, Medical Education and Family Welfare for necessary action.

¶25

Having regard to the aforesaid state of facts brought on record through the counter affidavit of the Respondents, we are of the view that the present petition can be disposed of ignoring the defects, giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent authority / Respondent No. 2 with a representation with all supporting documents, in case C.T. Scanning operation in the said hospital has not yet been started after the failure of the erstwhile Firm to install and make it operational. In respect of rest of the grievances, it is apparent that appropriate legal steps have been taken against the Firm. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶26

( Aparesh Kumar Singh, J )

¶27

Ranjeet/

Kameshwar Prasad v. Health

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kameshwar Prasad v. Health

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

Alok Dutt Pandey Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Others

Bushara Khatoon Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Naveen Kumar Gupta Vs Maya Devi

Deepak Vs Chief Secretory

Uma Shankar Mahto Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Yakub Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary and Ors.