The Allahabad High Court on Monday quashed the Uttar Pradesh Government order of December 24, 2020, cancelling the affiliation of Dayal Nursing Home, Mundera, Prayagraj on charges of forgery in the Ayushman Bharat scheme and the Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana (PM-JAY) scheme, calling it contrary to natural justice.
The Division Bench of justice SP Kesharwani and Justice RN Tilhari passed this order while hearing a writ petition filed by Mukesh Tandon.
According to the petitioner, he owns and runs a hospital under the name and style of “Dayal Nursing Home, having its registered office A-1 H.I.G., Mundera, Prayagraj”. The hospital is empanelled under the scheme of central government called as “Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana (PMJAY)”.
Earlier, the scheme was known as Ayushman Bharat Jan Arogya Yojana. According to the respondents, on receipt of certain information from National Anti Fraud Unit (NAFU) with respect to the working of the petitioner’s hospital, the Petitioner’s hospital was put on “Watch-List” of the State Anti Fraud Unit (SAFU).
The super specialist was hired by the State Health Agency (SHA) i.e. Avighna Mednet (OPC) Pvt. Ltd, which submitted its analysis report. On the basis of alleged prima facie fraudulent activity, the empanelment of the petitioner’s hospital was suspended by order dated December 04, 2020 with immediate effect, by the state health agency.
Counsel for the petitioner and counsels for the respondents both jointly stated before us that the procedure has been followed till the stage of suspension and, therefore, that may not have interfered at this stage.
Accordingly, we hold that the suspension of empanelment of the petitioner’s hospital dated December 04, 2020 shall continue and shall be subject to the final decision as may be taken by the competent authority in accordance with the law.
Breach of principles of natural justice is an important issue involved in the writ petition. It has been submitted by counsel for the petitioner that the order has been passed without show-cause notices and thus the principles of natural justice have been violated.
The first and foremost principle of natural justice is commonly known as audi alteram partem rule. It says that no one should be condemned unheard. Notice is the first limb of this principle. It must be precise and unambiguous. It should appraise the party determinatively the case he has to meet.
“The principles of natural justice are those rules which have been laid down by the courts as being the minimum protection of the rights of the individual against the arbitrary procedure that may be adopted by a judicial, quasi-judicial and administrative authority while making an order affecting those rights. These rules are intended to prevent such authority from doing injustice. Even an administrative order which involves civil consequences must be consistent with the rules of natural justice”, the court said.
The court stated that Natural justice has been variously defined by different judges, for instance, a duty to act fairly, the substantial requirements of justice, the natural sense of what is right and wrong, fundamental justice and fair-play in action. Over the years by a process of judicial interpretation, two rules have been evolved as representing the principles of natural justice in the judicial process, including therein quasi-judicial and administrative process.
Read Also: Utility duct on highways, roads: Supreme Court issues notice on PIL seeking directions to Centre
Counsel for the respondents has stated before us on instruction that no show cause notice was issued to the petitioner’s hospital before passing the final order of de-empanelment and the imposition of the penalty.
Thus, we find that non-issuance of show-cause notice to the petitioner’s hospital before passing the final order, has resulted in the breach of the principle of natural justice, the court said.
“Since it is admitted case of the respondents that neither any show
cause notice was issued nor any opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioner confronting with the material available in the hands of the respondents, therefore, the order dated December 24, 2020 passed by the chief executive officer of State Health Agency (SHA), U.P. Lucknow cannot be sustained and is hereby quashed”, the order reads.
The court disposed the writ petition with the following directions:-
(i) The concerned authority shall follow the procedure as provided in step-5 of part-B of para 1.10 of the guidelines and pass a final order within 30 days after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
(ii) The order of suspension dated December 04, 2020 shall remain subject to the final order as may be passed by the competent authority regarding de-empanelment and penalty, if any.
(iii) The competent authority shall take a decision in accordance with the law without being influenced by any of the observations on merits of the case made by this Court in the body of this order.