Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 59901
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
V.Lakshminarayanan, J
Dr.M.G.Ethayarajan – Appellant
Versus
The Director, Directorate of Medical and Rural Health Services – Respondent
W.P.(MD).No.5568 of 2025 | W.M.P.(MD).Nos.4062 | W.M.P.(MD).Nos.4064 | W.M.P.(MD).Nos.5812 of 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.Sricharan Rangarajan, Mr.D.Saravanan
For the Respondents: Mr.S.Shaji Bino
The suspension of a medical practitioner's license was quashed due to violations of natural justice and excess jurisdiction by the authorities, as they failed to furnish critical inspection reports and misapplied regulations.
Headnote:(A) Tamil Nadu Private Clinical Establishments (Regulation) Act, 1997 - Violation of principles of natural justice; lack of jurisdiction by the competent authority - Petitioner, a medical practitioner, challenged the suspension of his clinic's license by the authorities, citing insufficient qualifications and unauthorized practices. The Court found that the petitioner was not provided necessary inspection reports which resulted in a violation of natural justice and that the action taken by the authority exceeded its jurisdiction under the Act. The Court ruled that there was no breach as alleged and hence, the order is quashed. (Paras 41-74)
(B) Rules of natural justice - The authority's reliance on inspection reports without serving them to the petitioner constituted a clear breach of fair hearing requirements. (Paras 40-44)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a medical doctor with extensive but disputed qualifications, challenged an order from health services authorities suspending his clinical establishment's license following inspections. The authorities raised issues about his operating practices in cardiology without adequate qualifications.
Findings of Court:
The Court held that the petitioner was denied necessary documentation and that any claims about his practice violated the regulations set forth were not substantiated.
Issues: Did the authorities violate the principles of natural justice and act outside their jurisdiction in suspending the petitioner’s license?
Ratio Decidendi: The lack of service of critical inspection reports to the petitioner constituted a breach of natural justice. Moreover, the authority exceeded its jurisdiction by enforcing regulations not grounded in the statutes governing clinical practices in Tamil Nadu.
Result: Writ Petition allowed; suspension of license quashed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner is a qualified medical professional. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. enquiries initiated against petitioner based on complaints. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. committee formed to evaluate the situation. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. arguments by petitioner regarding violation of natural justice. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 5. respondents emphasize adherence to regulations. (Para 23 , 24) |
| 6. court's evaluation of natural justice principles. (Para 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 7. court highlights procedural biases in enquiry reports. (Para 40 , 42 , 43) |
| 8. jurisdiction limitations of authorities under tnce act. (Para 56 , 57 , 58) |
| 9. final ruling quashing the impugned order. (Para 74) |
ORDER
The present Writ Petition challenges the order passed by the second respondent in his proceedings in Ref.No.550/E4/2025 dated 24.02.2025 and for a further direction to the respondents not to interfere with the practice of medical profession by the petitioner, except in accordance with law.
Brief facts:
2.The petitioner is a medical doctor. He is running a clinical establishment under the name and style of “Irudhayams Hospital” at No.465/ABL Channel Bank Road, VN Puram, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District. The affidavit and documents reveal that the petitioner completed his undergraduation in Medicine from Madurai Medical College in 1986. He registered himself as a practitioner with the Tamil Nadu Medical Council in 1987. Thereafter, he has undergone the following training:
(i) Special training in General Medicine with the Government Headquarters Hospital at Nagercoil;
(ii) Special training in Pediatrics at the same institution;
(iii) Special training in Dermatology at the same institution;
(iv) Special training in Cardiovascular cartography at at the Center of Advanced Research and Development (CARD), Bangalore;
(v) Diploma in Non-invasive Cardiology from Tashkent Medical University;
(vi) Post Graduate Diploma in Health Sciences in Diabetology from Annamalai University;
(vii) Post Graduate in Clinical Cardiology from IMA AKN Sinha Institute of Continuing Medical and Health Education and Research, New Delhi;
(viii) Post Graduate Diploma in Health Sciences in Echo Cardiography from Annamalai University;
(ix) Master of Health Science (Preventive Cardiology) from Annamalai University;
(x) Master of Health Science (Diabetology) from Annamalai University; and
(xi) Special training in Enhanced External Counter Pulsation (EECP) technique from Clarity Medical Equipments.
3.The petitioner claims that he had gained experience in Cardiology by working under one, Dr.Arthanaree, M.D., D.M. (cardio) for nearly 10 years. The said Arthanaree is a Senior Interventional Cardiologist at Apollo Hospitals, Chennai with nearly 45 years of experience in the said field.
4.He claims that using cardiovascular cartography, a non- invasive method, he is able to detect coronary artery blocks. The blocks that are detected are managed again by using non- invasive methods unlike Angiogram, Angioplasty or Bypass surgery, which require a expert Cardiologist or a Cardiovascular Surgeon. He claims to be trained in Enhanced External Counter Pulsation (EECP) techniques and Cartography and utilizing the said knowledge, he has been attending to patients with Nagercoil as his headquarters.
5.The cause of action for the present Writ Petition is a communication that he had received from the second respondent / Joint Director on 19.02.2025. On 19.02.2025, the second respondent issued a notice to the petitioner calling upon him to appear for an enquiry in the afternoon at about 4.00 PM, in order to verify the following details, which came to light at the time of inspection on the very same day by the second respondent in the forenoon:
(i) EECP (Enhanced External Counter Pulsation) equipment was being utilized in the clinical establishment of the petitioner;
(ii) Electro-cartogram equipments were being used in the clinical establishment; and
(iii) With only an MBBS qualification, the petitioner was treating persons, who
