Reached Daily Limit?

Explore a new way of legal research!

Click Here
Delhi High CourtIndian Cases

Parnami Orthopedic Hospital And Joint … vs Govt Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors. on 12 July 2006

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Delhi High Court
Parnami Orthopedic Hospital And Joint … vs Govt Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors. on 12 July, 2006
Author: Anil Kumar
Bench: Anil Kumar
JUDGMENT

Anil Kumar, J.

1. Issue rule.

2. With the consent of the parties the matter is taken up for final disposal.

3. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner claiming inter alia that no coercive action be taken against the petitioner’s nursing home, “Parnami Orthopedic Hospital and Joint Replacement Centre”, on account of non registration of the nursing home for the years 2004- 2005 and subsequent years. The petitioner was granted registration for 2003-04, however, thereafter, the petitioner applied for 2004-05 but the nursing home has not been registered. The registration certificate for 2004-05 and for subsequent years has not been issued on account of non-compliance of Rule 3 and the application of the petitioner has not even considered and accepted. The learned Counsel for the petitioner stated that respondent Nos.2 and 3 are not issuing the registration certificate and are rather threatening that the coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner though petitioner’s nursing home is stated to fulfilll all other conditions as required under the provisions of The Delhi Nursing Homes Act, 1953 except Rule 3 of the Nursing Home Registration (Amendment) Rules, 1992. The application of the petitioner has not been accepted for 2006-07 on this account and not considered for previous years.

4. The petitioner asserted that in view of pendency of various writ petitions in respect of other nursing homes and in view of the pendency of Writ Petition No.4233/1993 before a Division Bench, the registration certificates have been issued by the respondents to other medical centers and nursing homes despite non compliance of Rule 3 of the Nursing Home Registration (Amendment) Rules, 1992 by such other medical centers but not to the petitioner.

5. The dispute seems to be mainly regarding Rule 3 of Delhi Nursing Home Registration (Amendment) Rules, 1992, dispute about which, whether is it required or not, is pending adjudication before the division bench in Civil Writ Petition no. 4233 of 1993.

6. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents not to advert to Rule 3 of Delhi Nursing Home Registration (Amendment) Rules, 1992 till the disposal of the said Writ Petition No.4233/1993 by the Division Bench at the time of consideration of the applications of the petitioner for registration of his medical centre for the different years.

7. The learned Counsel for the respondents, however, stated that the petitioner’s application for registration for 2006-07 shall be accepted from the petitioner and the applications for previous years shall be disposed of within 60 days. The application for 2006-2007 shall be disposed off within sixty days its receipt without adverting to Rule 3 of the Delhi Nursing Home Registration (Amendment) Rules, 1992. The petitioner is directed to file his application for registration within two weeks with the respondents. It is also clarified that after disposal of petitioner’s applications without adverting to Rule 3 of Delhi Nursing Home Registration (Amendment) Rules, 1992, the petitioner shall have liberty to approach this Court, if required, by way of fresh petition.

8. With these observations the writ petition is disposed of.

9. dusty to the parties.

10. All interim applications are disposed of as infructuous.