IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.6418 OF 2018 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
C. T. SUBRAMANYA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, S/O C. K. TAMMEGOWDA, HEBBALE, SOMAVARAPETE TALUK, MADIKERI.
… PETITIONER (BY SRI. SUMANTH KUMAR S. PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, HEALTH DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU – 560 001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. THE DISTRICT HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE OFFICER, KODAGU, MADIKERI – 571 201.
3. THE KARNATAKA AYURVEDIC AND UNANI PRACTITIONERS BOARD AUTHORITIES, BRIGADE PLAZA, 1ST FLOOR, ANAND RAO CIRCLE, S. C. ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 009.
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.
… RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. PRATHIMA HONNAPURA, AGA FOR R1 & R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 24.01.2018 PASSED BY THE R-2 VIDE ANNEXURE – B AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Sri. Sumanth Kumar S. Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Smt. Prathima Honnapura, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2.
The petition is admitted for hearing. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
2. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia has assailed the validity of the order dated 24.01.2018 passed by respondent No.2 by which the clinic of the petitioner has been seized.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has raised a singular contention that before taking the aforesaid action neither any notice was issued nor any opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioner which is per se bad in law.
4. Learned Additional Government Advocate submits that suitable action in accordance with law shall be taken and the petitioner shall be afforded an opportunity of being heard.
5. In view of the aforesaid submission and in the facts of the case, the petition is disposed of with a direction that in case the petitioner submits a fresh representation to respondent No.2 within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today, respondent No.2 shall decide the aforesaid representation after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner by a speaking order in accordance with law within a period of one week from the date of receipt of such a representation without being influenced by the order dated 24.01.2018 in any manner.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE Mds/-