DR.GIRISH NOOLA S/O. DR.SHIVASHARANAPPA NOOLA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JUNE, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE G. NARENDAR WRIT PETITION NO.200729/2017 (GM-RES) BETWEEN Dr. Girish Noola S/o Dr. Shivasharanappa Noola, Age: 46 years, Occ: Medical Practitioner, R/o: Plot No.3, Swastik Nagar Near Income Tax Office, Sedam Road, Kalaburagi-585104. ... Petitioner (By Sri. Ameet Kumar Deshapande, Advocate) AND 1. The State of Karnataka Represented by the Prl. Secretary Dept.of Health of Family Welfare, (Revenue) Kalburagi, Mini Vidhana Soudha, Kalaburagi-585101. 2. The Deputy Commissioner Kalaburagi & Chairman Registration Authority, KPME, Kalaburagi. 3. The Directorate of Health and Family Welfare Service, NABDCP Division,

2 Anand Rao Circle, Bangalore-560 009. 4. The District Health and Family Welfare Officer, Mini Vidhan Soudha, Kalaburagi-585101. ... Respondents (By Sri A.Syed Habeeb, AGA) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of certiorari or order appropriate writ or order, call for the records and upon a perusal thereof, quash and set aside the impugned order received on 30.11.2016 issued by the Respondent No.2 dated Nil, in File No. KPME/2016/17 copy of which at Annexure-A. This petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing ‘B’ Group this day, the court made the following: ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned AGA. 2. The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the proceedings of the 2nd Respondent who acting as the Deputy Commissioner and Chairman of the Registering authority under the Karnataka Private Medical Establishment Act, 2007 has been pleased to pass an order whereby it was intended to suspend the

3 licence issued to the petitioner for running the establishment under the name and style of Dr. Girish Noola Surgical and Maternity Hospital, Kalaburagi. 3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petition is rendered infructuous as the impugned order has expended itself by efflux of time. In the impugned order at Annexure-A, it is ordered that suspension of registration shall be with effect from the date of issuance. The said order is dated nil, but the same was received on 30.11.2016. 4. Per contra learned AGA submits that it could be clarified that the observations made by this Court shall not come in the way of the respondent completing the enquiry pursuant to which the licence was suspended. 5. The submissions of the respective counsels are placed on record. The learned counsel for the

4 petitioner in contending that the writ petition has spent itself on account of the impugned proceedings having stood determined by efflux of time. It is clarified that disposal of the writ petition as having been rendered infructuous shall not come in the way of the respondent in continuing the enquiry as proposed under Annexure- A. The Writ petition stands disposed off accordingly. Sd/- JUDGE *MK