IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.781 of 2011 (Arising out of C.W.J.C. No. 10568/2010) Dr.Murlidhar Jaiswal son of Late Parsuram Jaiswal resident of village Lohchi, P.S.- Kharaghpur, District-Munger. The Secretary of Sumitra Hospital Lohchi Kharagpur, Munger…………………………………………….Appellant/Petitioner. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar. 2. State Health Society Parivar Kalyan Bhawan, Seikhpura, Patna. 3. Civil Surgeon, Munger at Sadar Hospital, Campus Munger. 4. Programme Manager District Health Society, Munger…………………………………Respondent/Respondents ----------- 3. 19.8.2011 Heard the parties. The writ petition bearing C.W.J.C. No. 10568 of 2010 preferred by the appellant has been dismissed by the order under appeal dated 6.12.2010. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that Annexure 2 dated 27.8.2008 issued by the Civil Surgeon, Munger shows that accredition was given to the hospital of the appellant for doing operations and works relating to family planning as per scheme of Bihar Health Society and bank guarantee furnished by the appellant for Rs. 50,000/- on 15.9.2008 was returned after several months only through impugned letter No. 267 dated 12.6.2009 issued by Civil Surgeon, Munger. He submits that even if the authorities subsequently found the hospital to be lacking in required standards, they should have cancelled the accredition only prospectively and should have communicated to the appellant that he was not to 2 continue with the family planning operation etc. According to the appellant, some operations authorized under the scheme were conducted at his hospital and payment or incentive for such operation has not been paid by the respondents without any valid justification and in violation of the contract created between the parties. On behalf of the respondents it has been submitted that the claim that operations were conducted at the hospital of the appellant is seriously disputed and inspection report shows that it was not possible to conduct operations in that hospital on account of lack of Surgeon, Anaetheist and staff Nurses. We find that the dispute between the parties is mainly on account of an alleged contract involving disputed questions of fact. Hence, we dispose of this appeal with liberty to the appellant that if so advised, he may approach the Civil Court for relief in accordance with law. Mkc/ (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (Shivaji Pandey, J.)