Calcutta High Court
The Calcutta Medical Research ... vs The Director General Of Health ... on 10 November, 2008
Author: Soumitra Pal
Bench: Soumitra Pal
WP No. 1511 of 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
ORIGINAL SIDE
THE CALCUTTA MEDICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE & ORS Petitioner/Applicant
Versus
THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF HEALTH SERVICE(M.G.Sec)New Delhi Respondents
For Plaintiff/Petitioner : Mr.J.P.Khaitan, Sr. Advocate. For Defendant/Respondent : Mr.P.K.Tarafder, Advocate. BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL Date : 10th November, 2008.
The Court : In the writ petition the petitioners stated to be the members of the Governing Body or members and trustees of the Calcutta Medical Research Institute, have challenged the legality and/or validity of the order dated 30th March, 2001 issued by the Deputy Director General (M), 2 respondent no.2 and the alleged failure on part of the respondent nos.1,2 and 3 to deal with or in disposing of the application dated 15th May, 2001 made by the Institute for withdrawal or cancellation of the said order. It has been stated that from the year 1988 to 1993 the said Institute had enjoyed certain exemptions under the Customs Act, 1962. Necessary exemptions were granted after the factual aspects were verified and forwarded by the Director General of Health Services, West Bengal, respondent no.4 to the respondent nos.1 and 2. Consequently on the said basis customs authorities, that is, respondent nos.5 and 6 had also granted necessary exemptions. Such exemption notifications were rescinded in the year 1994. It has been alleged that on 9th April, 2001 the Institute received a communication dated 30th March, 2001 from the Deputy Director General wherein it has been alleged that the Institute had failed to provide free medical treatment to 40% of its outdoor patients and free medical treatment to all indoor patients whose income was less than Rs.500/- per month and, thus, was not entitled to retain Customs Duty Exemption Certificate (CDEC) issued to it. Thereafter, CDEC issued was withdrawn with immediate effect. Denying the allegations the petitioners by a letter dated 15th May, 2001 had filed a detailed reply. Subsequently, further representations were furnished on 16th May, 2001, 28th 3 May, 2001 and 22nd June, 2001. The matter was heard on 24th July, 2001 when submissions were advanced and brief synopsis of the submissions was filed.
The grievance of the petitioner is that though The Director of Health Services, West Bengal, the respondent no.4 after thorough verification by letter dated 12th September, 2001 had made recommendation, the Central Health authorities have ignored the same. Since the matter pending since 2001 has a bearing on the proceedings before the customs authorities pending pursuant to the order of remand passed by the CESTAT, East Regional Bench, Kolkata, necessary orders may be passed after directing the respondents to give the petitioners an opportunity to deal with the inspection report prepared at the instance of Rosha Committee and to give an opportunity of hearing.
Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent nos.1,2,3,5 and 6 denying the allegations has submitted that the petitioners have been granted every opportunity to represent and put forward their case in accordance with the principles of natural justice.
It appears that the issue regarding the import of medical equipments by the Institute is pending before the Union Health Ministry as well as before the Department of Revenue. The matters factually are interlinked. Since the 4 matter is pending before the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India since 2001 and as no order has been passed, considering the facts and circumstances the writ petition is disposed of by directing the Director General of Health Services (M.G.Sec.), respondent no.1 or any officer authorised by him, not below the rank of Deputy Director General to dispose of the matter regarding the withdrawal of Customs Duty Exemption Certificates (CDEC) by passing reasoned order in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the representatives of the petitioners. Since it has been submitted that the petitioners have not been provided with copies of the inspection reports prepared at the instance of Rosha Committee and other documents relied on by the respondents, the respondent no.1 is directed to furnish copies of the said report or any other document relied on atleast fifteen days prior to the date of hearing. After copy of report and documents are furnished, the respondent no.1 or the officer authorised shall proceed with the hearing and shall pass a reasoned order in accordance with law within four weeks.
Since the proceedings before the customs authorities are dependent on the factual aspects to be dealt by the respondent no.1, the customs authorities shall proceed with the matter pending before them expeditiously after the 5 reasoned order is passed by the respondent no.1 or by the officer authorised.
I make it clear that I have not gone into the merits of this case and all points are left open to be dealt with by the respondent no.1 or by the officer authorised. Since the respondents were not called upon to file affidavits controverting the allegations in the writ petition, the allegations are deemed not to have been admitted by them.
The writ petition is disposed of.
No order as to costs.
All parties concerned are to act on a xerox signed copy of this order on the usual undertakings.
(SOUMITRA PAL, J.) ssaha RO(ct)