M/S GIRISH NOOLA SURGICAL vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SUJATHA W.P.NO.202072/2018 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: M/S. GIRISH NOOLA SURGICAL AND MATERNITY HOSPITAL SWASTIK NAGAR SEDAM ROAD, KALABURAGI REPRESENTED BY DR.GIRISH NOOLA S/O SHARNAPPA NOOLA AGE: 45 YEARS OCC: MEDICAL PRACTITIONER R/O PLOT NO.3, SURVEY NO.64A SWASTIK NAGAR NEAR INCOME TAX OFFICE SEDAM ROAD, KALABURAGI ... PETITIONER (BY SRI AMEET KUMAR DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE) AND 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE, ROOM NO.123 VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-1

2 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND CHAIRMAN, REGISTRATION AUTHORITY UNDER THE KARNATAKA PRIVATE MEDICAL ESTABLISHMENTS ACT, 2007 OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KALABURAGI-1 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI K.M. GHATE, AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT RESPONDENT NO.2 HEREIN TO CONSIDER, PROCESS AND GRANT THE APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF REGISTRATION UNDER THE KARNATAKA PRIVATE MEDICAL ESTABLISHMENTS ACT, 2007, FILED BY THE PETITIONER HEREIN ON 14.04.2016, THE COPY OF WHICH IS AT ANNEXURE-B, FORTHWITH AND DIRECT RESPONDENT NO.2 TO CONSIDER THE REMINDER APPLICATION DATED 24.05.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER HEREIN, THE COPY OF WHICH IS AT ANNEXURE-F, FORTHWITH AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:- ORDER Petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction of respondent No.2 in not considering the application for renewal of registration under the Karnataka Private Medical Establishments Act, 2007 (for short ‘the Act’) dated 14.04.2016 as well as the reminder application dated

3 24.05.2018 at Annexures-B and F respectively to the writ petition. 2. Petitioner has established the practice in Allopathic system of medicine and running a nursing home consisting of 10 beds for inpatients and other medical and non-medical infrastructures to cater the needs of the patients in Kalaburagi district. Petitioner had obtained Registration Certificate under the Act from the competent registration authority from the year 2011 to 2016. However, the renewal application filed by the petitioner has not been considered. Hence, this writ petition. 3. It is the contention of the petitioner that respondent No.2 has a statutory obligation of duty to process the application for renewal of registration submitted by the petitioner and grant to such renewal of registration within the reasonable time. However, even after lapse of two years, respondent No.2 has not considered, processed or granted renewal of registration.

4 4. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court finds it appropriate to direct respondent No.2 to consider the application for renewal of registration filed by the petitioner on 14.04.2016 at Annexure-B to the writ petition and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, in an expedite manner, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. Sd/- JUDGE Srt