Order on Board

1. By filing the present writ petition, the petitioner calls in question the legality and validity of the License Suspension Order dated 06.03.2026 issued by the Collector-cum-Supervisory Authority, District Gariyaband under the provisions of the Chhattisgarh State Upcharyagriha Tatha Rogopchar Sambandhi Sthapanaye Anugyapan Adhiniyam, 2010 (for short, ‘Adhiniyam, 2010’), whereby the licence of the petitioner hospital has been suspended with immediate effect on the ground that the reply submitted by the petitioner to the notice dated 19.02.2026 was found unsatisfactory. The petitioner has also challenged the Show Cause Notice dated 06.03.2026 on the ground that the mandatory procedure prescribed under Section 9 of the Adhiniyam, 2010 has not been followed, inasmuch as neither a 30 days’ notice was granted nor any specific allegation, inquiry report or adequate opportunity of hearing was supplied before passing the impugned suspension order, rendering the action arbitrary, non-speaking and violative of principles of natural justice. The petitioner has prayed for following relief(s):-

“10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ quashing the impugned License Cancellation order dated 06/03/2026 issued by the Collector-cum supervisory authority, Gariyaband District Gariyaband and Show Cause Notice dated 06/03/2026 issued by the Respondent No. 03 for being non-est in the eyes of law.

10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the respondent authorities to not to restrain the working of the Petitioner Hospital in any direct or indirect manner in the interest of Justice.

10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief(s), which is deemed fit and proper in the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case.”

2. Brief facts of the case, in a nutshell, are that one patient was admitted in the petitioner hospital with complaint of severe breathing problem, whereupon he was immediately examined and advised E.C.G., X-ray and other necessary pathological tests. The petitioner hospital promptly administered prophylactic treatment and, considering the critical condition of the patient, advised immediate admission and continuous medical observation. The treating doctor also apprised the family members about the seriousness of the patient’s condition and specifically advised them not to shift the patient from the hospital until he became medically stable.

3. However, despite such medical advice, the family members of the patient voluntarily submitted LAMA (Leave Against Medical Advice) on 08.02.2026 and decided to remove the patient from the hospital. Initially, the family members attempted to shift the patient on a two-wheeler, but upon intervention and advice of the hospital administration, they requested for an ambulance facility. Since the regular driver of the ambulance was unavailable at that time and considering the emergency condition of the patient, one of the family members, claiming himself to be a trained driver having experience in hospital transportation, requested permission to drive the ambulance.

4. Under compelling circumstances and in the interest of the patient, the petitioner hospital permitted the family members to use the ambulance only for shifting the patient to District Hospital, Gariyaband, situated nearby. However, instead of returning the ambulance after reaching the District Hospital, the family members allegedly proceeded towards Abhanpur-Raipur Road without informing the petitioner hospital, during which the oxygen supply in the ambulance got exhausted near Village Panduka and the patient unfortunately succumbed. Thereafter, the family members allegedly created disturbance and levelled false allegations against the petitioner hospital with an intention to exert pressure and malign its reputation. Subs