M/S.Isa Diagnostic Centre and Institute Pvt. Ltd.,Cuttack Vs State of Odisha

¶1

Corrected

¶2

Signature Not Verified

¶3

Digitally Signed Signed by: MANAS KUMAR PANDA Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, Cuttack Date: 16-Mar-2026 19:18:00

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶5

WP(C) No.18559 of 2025, WP(C) No.19881 of 2025, WP(C) No.20448 of 2025 & WP(C) No.3204 of 2026

¶6

(Under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India)

¶7

WP(C) No.18559 of 2025

¶8

M/s. Gurudev Hospital, Brahma Nagar, Berhampur, represented through its Proprietor Smt. Kalpana Baral

¶9

…. Petitioner

¶10

-versus-

¶11

State of Odisha, represented through its Principal Secretary, Department of Health and Family Welfare and Others

¶12

… Opposite Parties

¶13

Advocate(s) appeared in this case:-

¶14

For Petitioner : Ms. Deepali Mahapatra, Advocate For Opp. Parties : Mr. D. Nayak, A.G.A. Mr. Manoj Kumar Panda, counsel for O.P. No.6

¶15

WP(C) No.19881 of 2025

¶16

M/s. Aastha Hospital, Bhaba Nagar Main Road, Berhampur, represented through its Proprietor Prabhakar Padhi

¶17

…. Petitioner

¶18

-versus-

¶19

State of Odisha, represented through its Principal Secretary, Department of Health and Family … Welfare and Others Opposite Parties

¶20

WP(C) No.18559 of 2025, WP(C) No.19881 of 2025, WP(C) No.20448 of 2025 & WP(C) No.3204 of 2026

¶21

Page 1 of 6

¶22

Signature Not Verified

¶23

Digitally Signed Signed by: MANAS KUMAR PANDA Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, Cuttack Date: 16-Mar-2026 19:18:00

¶24

Advocate(s) appeared in this case:-

¶25

For Petitioner : Ms. Deepali Mahapatra, Advocate For Opp. Parties : Mr. D. Nayak, A.G.A. Mr. Manoj Kumar Panda, counsel for O.P. No.6, and Mr. Ramesh Sahoo, counsel for O.P. No.7

¶26

WP(C) No.20448 of 2025

¶27

M/s. Apex Neuro Scan & Diagnostics (P) Ltd., Jobra Road, Cuttack, represented through its …. Petitioners Managing Director Dr. Naresh Kumar Santuka and Another

¶28

-versus-

¶29

State of Odisha, represented through its Principal Secretary, Department of Health and Family … Welfare and Others Opposite Parties

¶30

Advocate(s) appeared in this case:-

¶31

For Petitioners : Mr. Lambit Senapati, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Biswa Chandan Mohanty, Advocate. For Opp. Parties : Mr. D. Nayak, A.G.A.

¶32

WP(C) No.3204 of 2026

¶33

M/s. ISA Diagnostic Center and Institute Pvt. Ltd., Medical Road, Cuttack, represented through its Managing Director Dr. Sasmit Kumar Sahu and Another …. Petitioners

¶34

WP(C) No.18559 of 2025, WP(C) No.19881 of 2025, WP(C) No.20448 of 2025 & WP(C) No.3204 of 2026

¶35

Page 2 of 6

¶36

Signature Not Verified

¶37

Digitally Signed Signed by: MANAS KUMAR PANDA Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, Cuttack Date: 16-Mar-2026 19:18:00

¶38

-versus-

¶39

State of Odisha, represented through its Principal Secretary, Department of Health and Family … Welfare and Others Opposite Parties

¶40

Advocate(s) appeared in this case:-

¶41

For Petitioners : Mr. Lambit Senapati, Advocate For Opp. Parties : Mr. D. Nayak, A.G.A.

¶42

CORAM: JUSTICE B.P. ROUTRAY JUDGMENT 6^th March, 2026

¶43

B.P. Routray, J.

¶44

1 . Heard learned counsel for respective petitioners, Mr. D. Nayak,

¶45

learned AGA for State – opposite parties in all the above matters, Mr. M.K. Panda, learned counsel for Berhampur Development Authority and

¶46

Mr. R. Sahoo, learned counsel for Berhampur Municipal Corporation.

¶47

2. All the four writ petitioners are the clinical diagnostic centers / nursing homes established as per the licenses granted under the Odisha Clinical Establishment (Control and Regulation) Act, 1990. The common issue involved in all the writ petitions is relating to grant of fire safety certificate. All the petitioners have prayed to exempt them from the requirement of the Odisha Fire Prevention and Fire Safety Rules, 2017

¶48

by virtue of the amended provisions inserted in 2025.

¶49

WP(C) No.18559 of 2025, WP(C) No.19881 of 2025, WP(C) No.20448 of 2025 & WP(C) No.3204 of 2026

¶50

Page 3 of 6

¶51

Signature Not Verified

¶52

Digitally Signed Signed by: MANAS KUMAR PANDA Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, Cuttack Date: 16-Mar-2026 19:18:00

¶53

3. Rule 9 of the Odisha Fire Prevention and Fire Safety Rules, 2017 (hereinafter referred as „2017 Rules‟) prescribes the classes of premises

¶54

or occupancies likely to cause risk of fire, which includes all clinical establishments. Sub-Rule 12 of Rule 9 prescribes that in case of existing buildings constructed or occupied as per approval prior to commencement of 2017 Rules, the Director may grant exemption from the conditions prescribed under these rules with reasons to be recorded in writing, without sacrificing reasonable safety, on receipt of an application from the owner of the building. By virtue of 2025 Amendment Rules, notified on 17^th March 2025, inter alia, a new subRule 13 was inserted to Rule 9, prescribing as follows:-

¶55

“(13) In case of existing buildings constructed or occupied after 1982 and prior to the commencement of the Odisha Fire Prevention and Fire Safety Rules, 2017, on receipt of an application from the owner of the building, without sacrificing reasonable safety, the Director may grant exemption from the condition of plan approval of the building as required in Form III and IV.”

¶56

4. The common grievance of all the petitioners, who are clinical establishments, that, their respective buildings / establishments were inspected by the Fire Officer upon their application after commencement of 2017 Rules and certain deficiencies have been pointed out, whereas

¶57

WP(C) No.18559 of 2025, WP(C) No.19881 of 2025, WP(C) No.20448 of 2025 & WP(C) No.3204 of 2026

¶58

Page 4 of 6

¶59

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: MANAS KUMAR PANDA Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, Cuttack Date: 16-Mar-2026 19:18:00

¶60

the amended sub-Rule (13) of Rule 9 prescribes for exemption from the approval required in terms of Form-III & IV. According to the petitioners these clinical establishments exist after 1982 but before commencement of 2017 Rules and so the exemption clause applies to their case.

¶61

5. On the other hand Mr. Nayak, learned AGA, submits as per the counter affidavit that none of the petitioners have applied for exemption after commencement of the 2025 Amendment Rules. Therefore, they need to apply for exemption in accordance with such amended provisions which is to be verified and considered in accordance with law.

¶62

6. It is admitted by all the petitioners that they have not made any application for exemption after commencement of the amended rules, but they all had made the applications initially and accordingly the buildings were inspected and certain deficiencies have been noticed by the concerned authorities. It is also agreed by learned counsels for all the petitioners that such deficiencies as noticed in their respective buildings / establishments cannot be cured at present since those buildings / establishments are already there prior to commencement of 2017 Rules.

¶63

7. In view of such facts as submitted by the parties that their buildings / establishments are existing after 1982 and functioning prior to

¶64

WP(C) No.18559 of 2025, WP(C) No.19881 of 2025, WP(C) No.20448 of 2025 & WP(C) No.3204 of 2026

¶65

Page 5 of 6

¶66

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: MANAS KUMAR PANDA Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, Cuttack Date: 16-Mar-2026 19:18:00

¶67

commencement of 2017 Rules, the petitioners are permitted to make application for exemption in terms of Sub-Rule (13) of Rule 9 of 2017

¶68

Rules, as amended in the year 2025, within a period of 45 days from today. In such event, the competent authority under 2017 Rules shall examine the case of each petitioner in accordance with law and may grant exemption from the conditions of building approval, provided the petitioners satisfy the necessary requirements in terms of the provisions stated above, within a period of two months thereafter.

¶69

8. Accordingly all the writ petitions are disposed of.

¶70

( B.P. Routray) Judge

¶71

M.K. Panda/P.A.

¶72

WP(C) No.18559 of 2025, WP(C) No.19881 of 2025, WP(C) No.20448 of 2025 & WP(C) No.3204 of 2026

¶73

Page 6 of 6

M/S.Isa Diagnostic Centre and Institute Pvt. Ltd.,Cuttack v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Isa Diagnostic Centre and Institute Pvt. Ltd.,Cuttack v. State of Odisha

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

Bhaskar Baral Vs State of Odisha

Ila Padhi Vs State of Odisha

Binodini Gahir Vs Union of India

Suresh Kumar Mishra Vs the Collector Cum District Magistrate, Cuttack

Kadraka Gouriama Vs State of Odisha

Sanjay Kumar Routray Vs State of Odisha