Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Dr. Prakash Shamrao Chaudhari, a medical practitioner, owned a sonography centre registered under the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 2003. On 18 June 2011, respondent authorities inspected the centre and found certain discrepancies. On the same day, they cancelled the registration of the centre and asked the petitioner to submit a reply within seven days. The petitioner challenged this cancellation by way of a writ petition, contending that the order was passed without issuing a notice under Section 20(1) of the Act and without affording an opportunity of hearing as required under Section 20(2). The petitioner relied on a Division Bench judgment of the Bombay High Court in Dr. Dashrath Shamrao Shinde v. State of Maharashtra, 2012 (4) All MR 156, which held that failure to follow the procedure under Section 20(1) and (2) renders the cancellation order unsustainable. The respondents argued that the order was passed after inspection and that the petitioner was given seven days to reply, but the court noted that the cancellation was effected immediately without prior notice. The court held that the procedure under Section 20(1) and (2) is mandatory and must be followed before cancellation. Since the order was passed without issuing a show cause notice and without hearing the petitioner, it was violative of natural justice and the statutory scheme. The court quashed the cancellation order and directed the respondents to restore the registration. However, the court clarified that the respondents are at liberty to initiate fresh proceedings in accordance with law, after giving due notice and opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The writ petition was allowed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Natural Justice - Pre-decisional Hearing - Section 20(1) and (2) of Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 2003 - Cancellation of registration without prior notice and opportunity of hearing is violative of principles of natural justice and statutory mandate - Held that the order of cancellation passed on the same day as inspection without issuing show cause notice is unsustainable and liable to be set aside (Paras 2-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the cancellation of registration of a sonography centre under the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 2003 without issuing a notice under Section 20(1) and affording an opportunity of hearing under Section 20(2) is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 18.06.2011 cancelling the registration of the petitioner's sonography centre is quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to restore the registration. However, the respondents are at liberty to initiate fresh proceedings in accordance with law after giving due notice and opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Rule made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Natural justice
- Pre-decisional hearing
- Cancellation of registration without notice is unsustainable
- Section 20(1) and (2) of Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act
- 2003
Case Details
2012 LawText (BOM) (08) 15
Writ Petition No. 6161 of 2012
Shri N. L. Choudhari for Petitioner, Shri S. B. Pulkundwar for Respondents/State
Dr. Prakash S/o Shamrao Chaudhari
The State of Maharashtra, The Collector Dhule, The District Appropriate Authority and Civil Surgeon General Hospital Dhule, The Appropriate Authority and Health Officer Municipal Corporation Dhule
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging cancellation of registration of sonography centre under the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 2003.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought quashing of the order dated 18.06.2011 cancelling the registration of his sonography centre and restoration of the registration.
Filing Reason
The registration was cancelled on the same day of inspection without issuing a show cause notice or affording an opportunity of hearing, in violation of Section 20(1) and (2) of the Act.
Issues
Whether the cancellation of registration without issuing notice under Section 20(1) and without affording opportunity of hearing under Section 20(2) of the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 2003 is sustainable.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the cancellation order was passed without following the procedure under Section 20(1) and (2) of the Act, i.e., without issuing a show cause notice and without hearing the petitioner, relying on Dr. Dashrath Shamrao Shinde v. State of Maharashtra.
Respondents argued that the order was passed after inspection and the petitioner was given seven days to reply, but the court noted that the cancellation was effected immediately.
Ratio Decidendi
The procedure under Section 20(1) and (2) of the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 2003 is mandatory. Cancellation of registration without issuing a show cause notice and without affording an opportunity of hearing is violative of principles of natural justice and the statutory mandate, and such an order is unsustainable.
Judgment Excerpts
The registration of the sonography centre of the petitioner has been cancelled without hearing the petitioner and without following the procedure as is prescribed under Sub Section 1 and 2 of Sec. 20 of the the PreConception and Pre Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act 2003.
The learned counsel relies on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in a case of Dr. Dashrath Shamrao Shinde Vs. State of Maharashtra and others reported in 2012 (4) All MR 156 to buttress his submissions that, if the notice U/Sec. 20(1) was not issued and an opportunity of hearing as required U/Sec. 20(2) of the Act of 2003 is not afforded, the order is unsustainable.
Procedural History
The petitioner's sonography centre was inspected on 18.06.2011. On the same day, the respondent authorities cancelled the registration and asked for a reply within seven days. The petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 6161 of 2012 challenging the cancellation order. The petition was heard and disposed of on 21.08.2012.
Acts & Sections
- Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 2003: Section 20(1), Section 20(2)
