IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 14TH JUNE 2010 / 24TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 18267 of 2010(S) -------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- KERALA STATE PUORAVAKASA SAMRAKSHANA SAMITHY, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN SRI.SREEDHARAN THERAMBIL, RESIDING AT THERAMBIL HOUSE, VELAPPAYA P.O., THRISSUR, THRISSUR-96. BY ADV. SRI.T.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE PRINCIPAL, GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE, MULANKUNNATHUKAVU, THRISSUR. 4. THE SUPERINTENDENT, GOVT. MEDICAL COLLEGE CHEST HOSPITAL, MULANKUNNATHUKAVU, THRISSUR. BY SENIOR GOVT. PLEADER, SRI. BENNY GERVASIS. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.Chelameswar, CJ. & P.N.Ravindran, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P(C) No. 18267 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 14th day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT J.Chelameswar, CJ. This is a writ petition with prayers as follows: “i. Call for the records relating to issuance of Ext.P5 communication issued by the 4th respondent and to quash the same by issuing a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or order. ii. To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or order or direction, directing the respondents not to reduce the bed strength or degrade the TB hospital from the original allotment as mentioned inExt..P1 judgment without the prior permission of this Court. iii. To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or order or direction, directing the respondents to restore all the facilities including new admission of inpatients better treatment by the efficient doctors and also providing food to the inpatient etc. as directed by this Honourable Court inExt.P1 judgment.” 2. By Ext.P5 impugned document the 4th respondent issued certain instructions clarifying that the bed strength of TB and Chest diseases in Medical College Chest Hospital, Thrissur is fixed as 55 from the year 2007 onwards. It appears that WP(C) No.18267 of 2010 -:2:- there was a higher bed strength in the above mentioned hospital allocated for the purpose of TB and Chest patients. Earlier there was a writ petition in this Court on an apprehension that the State and its officers are attempting to close the Medical College Chest Hospital, Mulankunnathukavu, Thrissur District. A Division Bench of this Court recorded a certain state of fact and disposed of the writ petition stating that the apprehension of the petitioner therein was baseless and there was no need to issue any direction to the State as sought for in the writ petition. 3. The allegation in the instant writ petition appears to be that the Superintendent of Government Medical College Hospital, Thrissur in Ext.P5 gave a clarification to his subordinates which is factually inconsistent with the information given to this Court at the time of disposal of the earlier writ petition, i.e., WP(C) No.20231 of 2009. 4. Assuming for the sake of argument that there is inconsistency as mentioned above, the petitioner is not able to establish before this Court that he has any specific cause of action. No specific infringement of any legal right or obligation WP(C) No.18267 of 2010 -:3:- on the part of the respondents, statutory or otherwise, to maintain a high bed strength above 55 in favour of TB and Chest disease patients is brought to the notice of the Court. These are all matters where the State and its officers are required to take decision depending upon the exigencies of the situation. In principle, there cannot be any permanency in such state of affairs. No factual foundation is found in the writ petition as to how the reduced bed capacity would either be illegal or violative of some mandate of law or inconsistent with the larger public interest. In the circumstances we do not see any merit in the writ petition and the writ petition is dismissed at the admission stage. J.Chelameswar, Chief Justice. P.N.Ravindran, Judge. ttb WP(C) No.18267 of 2010 -:4:-