IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. : 987 of 2006 Date of decision : 7.4.2008 Mansa Ram …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others …Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Deepak Gupta, J. The Hon’ble Mr. Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting ?1 No. For the petitioner : Mr. Rakesh Chandel, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Ram Murti Bisht and Mr. Rajesh Mandhotra, Deputy Advocate General Per Deepak Gupta, J. The petitioner by means of this writ petition has challenged the action of the respondents in constructing the Ayurvedic Dispensary at village Panyali. The brief facts of the case are that the Government of Himachal Pradesh sanctioned Ayurvedic Dispensary for village Chhandoh in the year 1989. This Ayurvedic Dispensary though sanctioned for village Chhandoh, was not infact opened in village Chhandoh but was opened in village Panyali. This happened in the year 1989. At the relevant time both the villages i.e. Panyali as well as Chhandoh fell under Gram Panchayat Patyalag. Thereafter, bifurcation of the Panchayat Patyalag took place and now village Chhandoh falls in Gram Panchayat Dadhol whereas village Panyali 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. falls in Gram Panchayat Patyalag. In 2006 a sum of Rs.one lakh was sanctioned for construction of Ayurvedic Dispensary Chhandoh. The respondents intend to use this amount for construction of the dispensary in village Panyali itself. This action is under challenge. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and respondents. Admittedly, the Ayurvedic Dispensary though sanctioned for village Chhandoh has been functioning in village Panyali since 1989. According to Shri Rakesh Chandel, it was initially functioning in the rented accommodation at village Panyali and now in the year 2005 one Kartar Singh has donated land in village Panyali in which the proposed construction is sought to be raised. Shri Rakesh Chandel has placed reliance on a Will executed by one Smt. Shankri whereby she had willed four biswas of land for construction of Ayurvedic Dispensary. It appears that Smt. Shankri has since expired and this land has been mutated in favour of the State. No doubt, the dispensary was sanctioned for village Chhandoh and should not have been opened in village Panyali. The fact, however, remains that it was opened in village Panyali as far back in the year 1989 and no objection to the same was ever made by any person including the petitioner till the filing of the writ petition in the year 2006. Something which had continued for 17 years cannot be shut-down because that will adversely affect the rights of many persons. We, therefore, do not contend to interfere in the functioning of the Ayurvedic Dispensary at village Panyali We are, however, of the view that since the original dispensary was sanctioned for village Chhandoh and Smt. Shankri has donated land to the State Government for raising Ayurvedic Dispensary at the said village, the State should sympathetically consider the representation of the people of village Chhandoh that they should also have some medical facility available to them at their village. We, therefore, directed the Principal Secretary (Health) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh to look into this aspect of the matter and in case the Principal Secretary (Health) feels that there is need for giving some medical facility to the people of village Chhandoh then some medical centre/dispensary may be opened in village Chhandoh. We may clarify that it is not necessary that only an Ayurvedic dispensary be opened at village Chhandoh but that dispensary can be of any type. It is for the Principal Secretary (Health) to decide what short of facility, if any, should be granted to the people of village Chhandoh. This writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No costs. ( Deepak Gupta), J. 7th April, 2008 ( Rajiv Sharma), J. ™