Back
1996 Supreme(Ori) 381
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
R.K. Patra, R.K. Dash, JJ.
JYOTIRMAYEE NAIK - APPELLANT
Versus
SUPERINTENDENT, S.C.B. MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL AND OTHERS - RESPONDENT
Original Jurisdiction Case No. 473 of 1996
Decided On : 29-03-1996
H.B. Mohanty, S.C. Mohanty, D.P. Mohanty, J.K. Bastia, B. Das and R.K. Nayak, for the Appellant; R.K. Mohanty, Additional Government Advocate, for the Respondent
The rule of audi alteram partem requires that a person be given an opportunity to be heard before a decision is made against them.
Headnote:
NATURAL JUSTICE - REMOVAL FROM NURSING COURSE - OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING - STUDENT NURSE - ADMINISTRATIVE ENQUIRY - GOVERNMENT ORDER - VALIDITY.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a student nurse, was removed from the nursing course after an administrative enquiry found that she had administered an injection directly into a patient's vein instead of through a drip. The petitioner challenged the removal order, arguing that she was not given a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the petitioner was not given a reasonable opportunity of hearing before she was removed from the nursing course. The court noted that the petitioner was not provided with a copy of the enquiry report, and that her explanation was not considered by the government before it ordered her removal.
Issues: Whether the petitioner was given a reasonable opportunity of hearing before she was removed from the nursing course.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the rule of audi alteram partem, which requires that a person be given an opportunity to be heard before a decision is made against them, was not complied with in this case. The court noted that the petitioner was not provided with a copy of the enquiry report, and that her explanation was not considered by the government before it ordered her removal.
Final Decision: The court quashed the removal order and allowed the writ petition.
JUDGMENT :
R.K. Patra, J. - The petitioner in this application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India impugns the validity of the order No. 17 dated 15-1-1996 (Annexore-3) of the Superintendent, S. C. B. Medical College Hospital. Cuttack removing her from the General Nursing and Midwifery Training Course.
2. The facts as averred in the application may be briefly stated :
The petitioner on being selected for the General Nursing and Midwifery Training Course attached to the S. C. B. Medical College Hospital, Cuttack took admission in the academic session 1994-95 and was a second year (Nursing) student at the material time. On 5-7-1995 she was allotted duty in the Unit I Medicine Ward of the hospital. By that time one Sudhir Kumar Singh, a Post Graduate student of Utkal University (Vani Vihar) was in bed No. 162 of the said Ward who had an attack of Cerebral Malaria. While attending to bed No. 162, she found from the medicine chart that three injections/ viz. Benitim, Epsoline and Rubiquine were to be administered to the patient. The first two injections were to be given directly whereas the third one was to be administered intravenously by diluting in 10% dextrose solution and saline drips were being given to the patient and second saline bottle was to start as per the instructions contained in the medicine chart the petitioner administered the first two injections, viz. Benitin and Epsoline to the patient and was about to administer the third one intravenously by diluting in 10% dextrose solution. At this moment, persons who were attending on the patient raised hue and cry to the effect that because of the petitioner's administering the injections, the conditions of the patient started deteriorating. The patient unfortunately died immediately thereafter. The attendants of the patient being enraged at the petitioner although she was in no way responsible for the death tried to assault her and the nurses and the doctors who were present then. The police arrived at the spot. When autopsy was going to be conducted over the dead body the attendants of the deceased did not allow the same to be done and took away the dead body after giving necessary declaration in the hospital Ward.
3. As the matter stood, the petitioner was surprised to receive the notice dated 1-1-1996(Annexure-1)from the Superintendent, S. C. B. Medical College Hospital, Cuttack (hereinafter referred to as 'the Superintendent') calling upon her to show cause as to why she would not be removed from the training course. It was mentioned in the notice that the petitioner administered Rubiquine injection directly in the vein of the patient instead of administering through drips and as a student nurse, she was not supposed to administer intravenous injection. In response to the said notice, she submitted her explanation as per Annexure-2 denying the entire allegations. She has specifically stated that she did not administer the Rubiquine injection to the patient and in absence of the post mortem report, it could not be conclusively held that cause of death was on account of administration of Rubiquine injection. She also specifically demanded for a copy of the report of the Revenue Divisional Commissioner. To her utter surprise she was served with the impugned order Annexure-3. According to the petitioner, the impugned order is vulnerable inasmuch as it was passed without giving her a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
4. The Superintendent Principal, Tutor, School of Nursing, S. C. B. Medical College Hospital, Cu tack and the State of Orissa represented by its Secretary in Health and Family Welfare Department are opp. parties 1 to 5 whereas the Revenue Divisional-Commissioner, Central Division, Cuttack is the opp. party No. 4 in the case. Counter affidavit has been filed by the Superintendent contending inter alia, that the administrative enquiry conducted by the Revenue Divisional Commissioner revealed that the petitioner administered the Rubiquine injecti
