Court No. - 34 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 45624 of 2010 Petitioner :- Dr. Panna Lal Nursing Home And Hospital Respondent :- Union Of India & Another Petitioner Counsel :- Anil Srivastava Respondent Counsel :- A. S. G. I.,S. P. Kesarwani 2010/62 Hon'ble Prakash Chandra Verma,J.
Hon’ble Ram Autar Singh,J.
Heard Sri Anil Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri
Ashok Nigam, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for
respondents 1 and 2 and Sri Shambu Chopra, learned counsel
appearing for respondent no.3.
Sri Anil Srivastava, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
argued at length, but could not show from the document that 10
persons beds of the hospital were reserved for patient belonging to
the family which has income of less than Rs, 500/- per month.
Learned counsel invited our attention to the reply given as under
by the hospital:-
“The hospital as per notification kept 10% beds (five Beds)
reserved for persons below the income of Rs.500/- per month
earmarking is not in notification however always five beds were
From the aforesaid statement, it is clear that 10% beds has not
been reserved which is in violation of mandatory conditions of the
notification by which the exemption was granted and on this basis
the representation of the petitioner has been rejected. No other
perversity could be indicated by the learned counsel for the
petitioner in the impugned order. Therefore, the petition is devoid
of merit and is accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 4.8.2010