MANZOOR ELAHI vs DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, SARGODHA Ss — 2021 PLD 843 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

MANZOOR ELAHI VS DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, SARGODHA Ss. 2(xviii), 2(xxix), 4, 22, 23 & 24--Punjab Healthcare Commission Regulations for Banning Quackery, 2016, Regln. 6---Application before the Punjab Health Care Commission for de-sealing a Clinic---Allegation against petitioner (deceased) that during the visit/inspection by the Manager Enforcement, the Petitioner was found practicing allopathy; that he had failed to show his qualification/registration to practice allopathy; that he was unable to produce registration/license issued by the Commission to establish/operate/run the Clinic; and the confiscated medical equipment proved the Petitioner a Quack---Petitioner was declared as quack and fine of Rs.330,000/- was imposed---Appellate Court dismissed appeal---Validity---Petitioner was owner of the (sealed) Property which was rented by the Doctor---Petitioner was employed by the Doctor as a Dispenser---Said doctor was not proceeded against who was simply separated from the proceedings and the proceedings were focused on the Petitioner to declare him as a Quack---Said Doctor was not summoned/examined by the Punjab Health Care Commission---Witness of the report was never summoned/examined---Manager Enforcement of the said Commission who visited and prepared the report was never summoned/examined/allowed to be cross examined---Affidavits obtained from the Petitioner with respect to de-sealing of the Property was treated as admission---All Inferences were drawn from the report without reference to the surrounding facts/circumstances of the case---Recovery of medical equipment/ machines were required to be verified if the same belonged to/being used by the Doctor or the Petitioner---Said Doctor had applied for registration of the Clinic (Healthcare Service Provider) mentioning the Petitioner as a Dispenser in Appendix B prior to the date of alleged inspection---Statement of the patient allegedly treated by Petitioner was not obtained--- Commission solely relied upon inspection report which was not appealing to the judicial conscience of High Court---Petitioner never claimed to be doctor/in charge of the Clinic---No inspection Team was appointed---Admittedly the inspection had been undertaken by a single functionary of the Commission which in itself was illegal in terms of S. 22(1) read with S.2(xviii) of the Act---Confiscation/seizure of medical equipment by the Manager Enforcement was in blatant violation of S.24 of the Act, 2010---Power to impose fine was granted to the Commission under various provisions of the Act, 2010 Commission did not specify as to which provision of the Act/Regulations was invoked for imposition of alleged fine of Rs.330,000/---Inspection of the Clinic was not sanctioned/conducted in accordance with the express provisions of the Act, 2010---Provisions of the Act, 2010 should always override to anything inconsistent in the Punjab Healthcare Commission Regulations for Banning Quackery, 2016---Constitutional petition was allowed, property was de-sealed and fine was ordered to be refunded.

MANZOOR ELAHI vs DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, SARGODHA Ss — 2021 PLD 843 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2021 PLD