IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 1ST NOVEMBER 2010 / 10TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 33118 of 2010(L) ---------------------- PETITIONER : ------------------ DR.V.PRAKASH, S/O.LATE SHRI.VIKRAMAN, AGED 62 YEARS, `PAVITHRAM', ERAMATHOOR, P.O.MANNANAM, ALLEPPEY DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.RASHEED C.NOORANAD SRI. VIVEK VARGHESE P.J. SRI. VARUGHESE M. EASO SRI. P.G. GOPALAKRISHNAN UNNITHAN SMT. MANEESHA KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE (E) DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1. 2. KERALA STATE MENTAL HEALTH AUTHORITY, REP. BY THE SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1. 3. CHAIRMAN, KERALA STATE MENTAL HEALTH AUTHORITY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P. NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 33118 of 2010 L ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 1st day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner submits that he has a hospital by name 'Elite Hospital' at Karthikappally, which has been established for treating mentally ill patients. Petitioner's case is that the hospital has adequate infrastructure including Psychiatrists for effective treatment of the patients and that as far as he is concerned, he only practises Hypnotism. It is stated that on the implementation of the Mental Health Act and Rules framed thereunder, the second respondent was constituted and an application was made way back on 24-04-2002 for licence. It is stated that by Ext.P11 order passed by the second respondent, his application for licence was rejected. Aggrieved by Ext.P11, petitioner filed Ext.P12 appeal before the first respondent. The appeal also has been rejected by Ext.P13. It is in these circumstances, writ petition is filed. 2. Various contentions have been raised by the W.P.(C) No.33118/10 : 2 : learned senior counsel for the petitioner, impugning Exts.P11 and P13. It is stated that the grounds mentioned in Ext.P11, which are reiterated in Ext.P13, are unsustainable and, therefore, these orders warrant interference by this Court. 3. However, in the nature of Ext.P13 order rejecting Ext.P12 appeal filed by the petitioner, I do not think it is necessary for this Court to go into the merits of this case canvassed by the learned senior counsel. This is mainly for the reason that Ext.P13 order was passed, without hearing the petitioner and that apart, the contentions raised by the petitioner have not been dealt with in Ext.P13. Therefore, Ext.P13 is passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and without adverting to the contentions raised. 4. In that view, Ext.P13 order is unsustainable and accordingly, I set aside Ext.P13. Writ petition is disposed of, directing that the appellate authority shall reconsider Ext.P12 appeal filed by the petitioner against Ext.P11 order passed by the third respondent. This shall be done with notice to the W.P.(C) No.33118/10 : 3 : petitioner and affording him an opportunity for hearing and at any rate, within three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. It is directed that in the meanwhile, further proceedings in pursuance to Ext.P14 issued by the third respondent directing closure of the petitioner's hospital shall be kept in abeyance. Petitioner to produce a copy of this judgment and writ petition before respondents 1 and 3 for compliance. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) aks