IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 11TH AUGUST 2009 / 20TH SRAVANA 1931 OP.No. 5477 of 2003(B) ---------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. DR.S.SANTHAKUMAR, PSYCHIATRIST, C/O. DR.SANTHAKUMAR'S NURSING HOME, KOZHIKODE. 2. DR.A.M.GOPALAKRISHNAN, PSYCHIATRIST, KRISHNA NURSING HOME, KOZHIKODE. 3. DR.P.M.VASUDEVAN, PSYCHIATRIST, SANTHI CLINIC, KOZHIKODE. 4. DR.SABU REHMAN, PSYCHIATRIST, VIVEKA HOSPITAL, KOZHIKODE. 5. DR.N.VIJAYAN, PSYCHIATRIST, VIJAYA HOSPITAL, KOZHIKODE. 6. DR.BASHEER, PSYCHIATRIST, C/O. CITY NURSING HOME, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.SAJAN MANNALI SRI.M.P.JAYAKUMAR SMT.T.K.PRASEEDA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, MINISTRY OF HEALTH, NEW DELHI. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE SERVICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. KERALA STATE MENTAL HEALTH AUTHORITY, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.PAUL JACOB, ADDL.CGSC FOR R1 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. MATHEW VADAKKEL FOR R2,3 THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/08/2009, ALONG WITH OP NO. 19114 OF 2002 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 ORDER ON CMP 9609 OF 2003 IN OP 5477 OF 2003 DISMISSED 11.8.2009 SD/-C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO. A26/995/MHA DATED 4.4.2002 OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONERS. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R2(a) TRUE COPY OF G.O.(P) NO. 222/97/H & FWD DATED 23.7.1997 EXT.R2(b) TRUE COPY OF G.O.(P) NO. 12/2003/H & FWD DATED 14.1.2003 TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. -------------------------------------------- O.P. NOs. 5477/2003 & 19114/2002 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT O.Ps. are filed challenging various provisions of the Mental Health Act, 1987. Statutory provisions under challenge pertain to appointment of Inspectors whose qualification is not prescribed under the Act. Besides this for compulsory admission, certification from two doctors is required under Section 19 of the Act, provision of which is also under challenge. Another grievance of the petitioners is about the provision authorising visit of patients by social workers. On going through the petitions, and after hearing counsel for the petitioners and Government Pleader, I am of the view that the main grievance is increase of licence fee for licence for Mental Hospital from Rs. 5,000/- to Rs. 25,000/- depending upon number of patients. Government Pleader submitted that fees was later reduced by 50%. In any case, counsel for the petitioners submitted that the order prescribing higher rate of fees under challenge in these OPs. is not enforced. On the other hand, an ad hoc amount of Rs. 1000/- is collected from every Hospital 2 without issuing licence. It is reported that the State is waiting for Central Government's clearance for notifying the rule which itself does not have any definite shape as of now. In any case, I am of the view that it is a half-hearted action by the State government pursuant to the decision of the Supreme Court after terrible tragedy in Tamil Nadu, wherein lot of mental patients lost their life in a fire. Obviously, Government is not earnest about making any law based on the judgment of the Supreme Court, nor are they interested in enforcing the provisions of the Act. No action is taken against any of the petitioners for violations. I do not think petitioners have any grievance as of now. Therefore OPs are closed leaving freedom to them to approach this Court to challenge adverse action if any taken against them. (C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge kk 3