Allowed

Kaveri Diagnostic Center v. the District Health Officer

Karnataka HC12 Jan 2024WP/490/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed an order closing a diagnostic centre. Disputes over the centre's distance from a government hospital were resolved by fresh surveys confirming the centre was over 200 meters away, making the closure under Section 6 of the Karnataka Private Medical Establishments Act unsustainable.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is allowed, and the order dated 26.12.2023 bearing No.G.AA.KU.Ka/Cha Na/K.P.M.E/11/2023-24 passed by Respondent No.1 is quashed.

Kaveri Diagnostic Center Vs the District Health… — Service and Employment | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:1678 WP No. 490 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 490 OF 2024 (GM-RES)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

KAVERI DIAGNOSTIC CENTER

¶8

NO. 972, UNION BANK BUILDING, DOUBLE ROAD, CHAMARAJANAGAR, CHAMARAJANAGAR - 571 313, REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. NAGENDRA NAIK R., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE DISTRICT HEALTH OFFICER, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE SERVICES, CHAMARAJANAGAR - 571 313.

¶13

Digitally signed by PADMAVATHI B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

THE COMMISSIONER, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE SERVICES, ANAND RAO CIRCLE, BANGALORE - 560 009.

¶15

THE TALUK HEALTH OFFICER, CHAMARAJANAGAR TALUK, CHAMARAJANAGAR - 571 313.

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SMT. NAVYA SHEKHAR, AGA)

¶18

¶19

NC: 2024:KHC:1678 WP No. 490 of 2024

¶20

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 26/12/2023 BEARING NO. G.AA.KU.KA/CHA NA/K.P.M.E/11/2023-24 PASSED BY THE R1 AS PER ANNEXURE-A.

¶21

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

ORDER

¶23

The petitioner is before this Court, seeking the following prayers:

¶24

”a. Issue a Writ in the Nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 26.12.2023 bearing NO.G.AA.KU.Ka/Cha Na/K.P.M.E/11/2023-24 Passed by the Respondent No.1 as per ANNEXUREA, and

¶25

b. To pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity."

¶26

Heard Sri. R. Nagendra Naik, learned counsel

¶27

appearing for the petitioner, Smt. Navya Shekhar, learned AGA appearing for the respondents and have perused the material on record.

¶28

The petitioner runs a diagnostic centre in the name and style of 'Kaveri Diagnostic Centre' at Chamarajanagar. The State initiates proceedings and closes down the diagnostic centre invoking the provisions of Karnataka Private Medical Establishments Act as amended in the year 2017. The closure

¶29

¶30

NC: 2024:KHC:1678 WP No. 490 of 2024

¶31

of the diagnostic centre of the petitioner is what has driven him to this Court in the said petition.

¶32

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that Section 6 as amended depicts that any diagnostic centre should not be within 200 meters radius from a Government Hospital. According to the learned counsel, the distance was 206 meters. The State had closed this centre on the score that the distance was 79 meters. It is at that juncture, this Court directed a separate survey to be conducted by the City Municipal Council by passing the following order on 05.01.2024, which reads as follows:

¶33

"The petitioner is before this Court calling in question an order dated 26.12.2023, which directs closure of the Diagnostic Center of the petitioner.

¶34

The reason for such closure is, the Proviso to Section 6 of the Karnataka Private medical Establishment Act (for short 'the Act'). Proviso to Section 6 of the Act mandates that no Diagnostic Center shall be permitted to be established, within a radius of 200 meters from any Government Hospital.

¶35

Learned counsel Sri.R.Nagendra Naik would submit that the CMC has given a report, which is depicting that the petitioner's Diagnostic Center is 206 meters away.

¶36

Learned AGA on instructions would submit that the very same CMC has given a report that it is 79 meters away from Government Hospital.

¶37

Therefore, there is divergence or incongruity in the report submitted by the CMC.

¶38

¶39

NC: 2024:KHC:1678 WP No. 490 of 2024

¶40

The State shall conduct a fresh survey with the help of PWD and with the presence of the petitioner and place it before the Court, on the next date of hearing.

¶41

List this matter on 12.01.2024 in the fresh matters

¶42

list.

¶43

Till such time, the impugned order shall remain stayed."

¶44

The result of the order passed on 05.01.2024 is the

¶45

conduct of survey and submission of a report to this Court, which depicts that the diagnostic centre of the petitioner is at

¶46

207 meters from the Government hospital.

¶47

Section 6 of the Act reads as follows:

¶48

" 6. Amendment of section 6 :- After section 6 of the Principal Act, the following proviso shall be inserted, namely:-

¶49

"Provided that no new Private Clinical Laboratory shall be permitted within a radius of 200 meters from the Government Hospital or from the Hospital promoted or managed by a society or trust or autonomous organization owned or controlled by the State Government or Central Government or Local Bodies with effect from the date of commencement of the Karnataka Private Medical Establishments (Amendment) Act, 2017."

¶50

Section 6 of the Act prohibits any diagnostic centre to be

¶51

permitted on and from coming into the force of the Act as amended within 200 meters from a government hospital.

¶52

A survey is conducted by the Public Works

¶53

Department and the City Municipal Council separately and both

¶54

¶55

NC: 2024:KHC:1678 WP No. 490 of 2024

¶56

of the reports concur that the diagnostic centre is at 206 mtrs by the City Municipal Council and 207 mtrs by the Public Works Department. Therefore, both the survey reports would indicate that the diagnostic centre of the petitioner does not come within the rigour of Section 6 supra. If it does not come within the rigour of Section 6 of the Act, the closure of the unit on the score that it is in the vicinity of the Government hospital would be unsustainble.

¶57

For the aforesaid reasons, I pass the following:

¶58

ORDER

¶59

i. Writ petition is allowed.

¶60

ii. The order dated 26.12.2023 bearing No.G.AA.KU.Ka/Cha Na/K.P.M.E/11/2023-24 passed by respondent No.1, is quashed.

¶61

Sd/JUDGE

¶62

SJK

¶63

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21 CT:SNN

Kaveri Diagnostic Center v. the District Health Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kaveri Diagnostic Center v. the District Health Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Niranjan Kumar Dadhichi Vs the Bangalore City Cooperative Bank Ltd.

Sri.S.Nagaraju Vs Smt.Mangala

Topsack Packaging Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Wajid Shariff Vs Piramal Capital and Housing Finance Ltd.

M/S Muthoot Finance Ltd. Vs State of Karnataka

Mr Subramanya Rao K Vs the Authorized Officer Canara Bank