The court upheld the validity of various provisions of the Clinical Establishments (Registration and Regulation) Act, 2010 and the Rules framed by the State of Uttarakhand, including the adoption of the Act by the State of Uttarakhand, the exclusion of clinical establishments owned by the Armed Forces from the Act's purview, the definition of "emergency medical condition," and the provisions regarding inspection of clinical establishments.

Heard learned counsel for the parties. Counter affidavit has been filed by the State to which Shri Arvind Vashishta learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners does not wish to file a rejoinder affidavit. Pleadings being complete matter is being heard finally.

2. All the petitioners before this Court are medical practitioners who are presently practicing in Dehradun. By means of the present writ petition, they have challenged the validity of various provisions of a Parliamentary Statute known as the Clinical Establishments (Registration and Regulation) Act, 2010 (from hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), and the Rules framed therein by the State of Uttarakhand in the year 2015. Admittedly, the Act is on a subject, which is in the State List at Item No. 6, which reads as under:-

“6. Public health and sanitation; hospitals and dispensaries.”

Considering that the subject matter of Legislation was a State subject, the Act has been passed by the Parliament in exercise of its power under Article 252 of the Constitution of India, which read as under:-

“252. Power of Parliament to legislate for two or more States by consent and adoption of such legislation by any other State.- (1) If it appears to the Legislatures of two or more States to be desirable that any of the matters with respect to which Parliament has no power to make laws for the States except as provided in articles 249 and 250 should be regulated in such States by Parliament by law, and if resolutions to that effect are passed by all the Houses of the Legislatures of those States, it shall be lawful for Parliament to pass an Act for regulating that matter accordingly, and any Act so passed shall apply to such States and to any other State by which it is adopted afterwards by resolution passed in that behalf by the House or, where there are two Houses, by each of the Houses of the Legislature of that State.

2. Any Act so passed by Parliament may be amended or repealed by an Act of Parliament passed or adopted in like manner but shall not, as respects any State to which it applies, be amended or repealed by an Act of the Legislature of that State.”

3. The Act was passed by the Parliament after four States, namely, Arunachal Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Mizoram and Sikkim, had resolved that in respect to the above subject matter, which was in the State List, the Parliament should make Legislation. Hence, initially the Act had its application only for the four States, namely, Arunachal Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Mizoram and Sikkim and the Union Territories but the other States could adopt the Act by a resolution passed by their State Legislature in terms of Article 252 of the Constitution of India.

4. The State of Uttarakhand by a resolution of the State Assembly on 29.03.2011, duly notified in the official gazette later on 18.08.2011, adopted the above Act. Subsequent to its adoption by the State of Uttarakhand, the State of Uttarakhand under the powers vested with it under Section 54 of the Act have also framed the Rules known as the Uttarakhand Clinical Establishments (Registration and Regulation) Rules, 2015 on 31.10.2015.

5. The first challenge of the petitioners in the present writ petition is that the State Legislature of Uttarakhand has never resolved to adopt the Act. This though has been rebutted in the counter affidavit of the State where it has come specifically that the Act was adopted by the resolution of the State Assembly on 29.03.2011 and was notified in the official gazette on 18.08.2011. On this, the contention of the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners Sri Arvind Vashishta was that the date on which the State Assembly had adopted the Act by a resolution on 29.03.2011, the Parliamentary Legislation i.e. the Clinical Establishments (Registration and Regulation) Act, 2010 had not been enforced as though the Act had received the assent of the President of India on 18.08.2010 but it was only notified in the official gazette on 28.02.2012 (which is a dat