ORISSA HIGH COURT: CUTTACK WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.4757 of 2012 In the matter of an application under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. ---------The Dean and Principal, ……… M.K.C.G. Medical College and Hospital, Berhampur and another Petitioners -VersusBijay Kumar Patnaik For Petitioners For Opp.party ……….. _______________ : : Opp. Party Mr. R.K. Mohapatra, Government Advocate, M/s.G.C. Acharya, K.M. Patra, P.K.Das, S.K.Behera, J.K.Mohapatra, K.Ghadei & R.Nayak. PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI V.GOPALA GOWDA AND THE HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE B.K.MISRA Date of judgment : B.K.MISRA,J.the 14.11.2012 The petitioners namely, the Dean and Principal as well as Superintendent of M.K.C.G., Medical College and Hospital, Berhampur being aggrieved with the order of the Permanent Lok Adalat for Public Utility Services Ganjam, Berhampur in P.L.A. Case No.24 of 2011 dated 7th February, 2012 directing the petitioners to keep open at least one flap of the twin western gate allowing patients, ambulance 2 and other light motor vehicles to reach the hospital hassle free for enabling persons who are in need of medical care have approached this Court by invoking the extra-ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 and 227.
2. One Sri Bijaya Kumar Patnaik of Berhampur belonging to the legal profession filed an application under Section 22C(1) of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 praying for a direction to the Superintendent as well as Dean and Principal of M.K.C.G. Medical College and Hospital, Berhampur to reopen the western gate of the Hospital which was abruptly locked on 7th September, 2011 on the pretext of prohibiting entry of heavy vehicles and to curb antisocial activities in the college campus by undesirable elements and ensure security to the patients and students of the Medical College.
3. According to the applicant there exists two gates leading to the M.K.C.G. Medical College and Hospital i.e. eastern gate which is said to be the main gate facing the eastern part of Berhampur city. The rear gate i.e. the western gate faces the new bus stand of the city on Gate Bazar-Goilundi road which also touches National Highway number 59. According to the applicant people from various parts of Ganjam district and also from other southern districts come to Berhampur for receiving best of medical treatment as M.K.C.G. Medical College and Hospital, Berhampur caters to the health problem of the people in the absence of any other good hospital in the area. The people who come by bus and by other modes to Berhampur have easy 3 accessibility to the hospital through the western gate but by its closure they have to traverse almost two kilometers that too a busy and congested road for coming to the Medical College Hospital. It is the further case of the petitioner that when the State Government has spent huge amount of money by erecting the western gate with pedestrian passages and security check post there is no justifiable reason for closure of the western gate. It is alleged that the said action of the authorities has affected the fundamental rights of the patients in getting medical services. Thus, the petitioner approached the permanent Lok Adalat for Public Utility Services for redressal of his grievance.
4. The present petitioners who were the respondents in P.L.A. Case No.24 of 2011 filed their joint written statement before the Permanent Lok Adalat for Public Utility Services Ganjam-Berhampur wherein it is their case that the western gate in question has been closed as per the policy decision and for the welfare of the patients and also to maintain peace and tranquility and healthy hospital atmosphere since for the last 40 years. Besides that it is their case that when there are other ways to enter the medical college in question, the applicant cannot claim entry into the Hospital premises through a particular gate. Accordingly, they prayed for dismissal of the application.
5. The Permanent Lok Adalat for Public Utility Services Ganjam, Berhampur attempted to settle the dispute in between the parties by resorting to the provisions of Section 22C(7) of the Legal 4 Services Authorities Act, 1987 but since the learned Addl. Government Pleader did not agree and stuck to the point that closure of the gate in question does not amount to deficiency in service rendered by the hospital, such attempt failed. Therefore, the Permanent Lok Adalat decided to deal with the dispute on merit under sub-section (8) of Section 22C of the Legal Services Act, 1987 and the impugned order at Annexure-1 was passed which has been challenged in this writ petition.
6. We have heard learned Government Advocate appearing for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel for the opposite party. The learned Government Advocate very vociferously attacked the impugned order passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat for Public Utility Services, Ganjam-Berhampur and contended that the said order is nonest in the eye of law as the authorities concerned traversed beyond its competence and usurped a jurisdiction which is not vested on it. Mr.Mohapatra, learned Government Advocate also challenged the impugned order on the ground that the impugned order was passed with undue haste and speed and that shows that the Permanent Lok Adalat for Public Utility Services Ganjam-Berhampur tried to over reach the highest court of the State i.e. this Court and did not observe the judicial discipline and propriety even though it was brought to its notice about the pendency of W.P.(C) No.27309 of 2011 filed by one Sri Pitabash Panda an Advocate of Ganjam Bar Association on 12.10.2011 praying therein for a direction to the authorities of M.K.C.G. Medical College and Hospital, Berhampur for opening of the gate over looking 5 the new bus stand Berhampur which has been closed by the authorities. It is contended that despite the said information furnished to the Permanent Lok Adalat, the authorities proceeded to adjudicate the P.L.A. Case No.24 of 2011 and passed the impugned order and therefore the same needs to be quashed.
7. With the avowed object of providing speedy and inexpensive justice to the people of this country the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 has been enacted by the Parliament. The further object is to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen and to organize Lok Adalats to secure that the operation of the legal system promote justice on a basis of equal opportunity. In view of the growing popularity there has been an ever increasing demand for establishing Permanent Lok Adalats and the same has been inserted in Chapter 6A of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. Section 22 A(a) speaks for establishment of Permanent Lok Adalat and Section 22B empowers the State authority to establish Permanent Lok Adalats in respect of one or more Public Utility Services for such areas as would be notified in the notification. What is Public Utility Service that has been defined in Clause (b) of Section 22A of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 and the same reads as follows:“(b) “public utility service”. means any(i) transport service for the carriage or passengers or goods by air, road or water; or (ii) postal, telegraph or telephone service; or (iii) supply of power, light or water to the public by any establishment; or (iv) system of public conservancy or sanitation; or 6 (v) service in hospital or dispensary; or (vi) insurance service, and includes any service which the Central Government or the State Government, as the case may be, in the public interest, by notification, declare to be a public utility service for the purposes of this Chapter.”
8. Thus, Permanent Lok Adalats for Public Utility Services have been established to decide disputes relating to deficiency of service pertaining to Public Utility Services as mentioned in Section 22A(b) of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. Service in hospital or dispensary means the system that provides medical care facilities and treatment to the patients i.e., treatment by doctors, nursing staff and attendants attached to a Hospital or Dispensary.
9. The Permanent Lok Adalat for Public Utility Services Ganjam-Berhampur in para five of its impugned order has observed that by virtue of sub-section (2) of Section 22 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, the Permanent Lok Adalat is to adopt its own procedure for determination of the dispute as it is a special tribunal and therefore, when conciliation initiated by it for opening of the western gate of M.K.C.G. Medical College and Hospital, Berhampur failed, it cannot sit helpless and therefore assumed jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute under sub-section 8 of Section 22C of the Legal Services Authorities Act.
10. Sub-section 8 of Section 22C of the Orissa Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 says that where the parties fail to reach at an 7 agreement under Section 7, the Permanent Lok Adalat shall, if the dispute does not relate to any offence, decide the dispute.
11. Sub-section 7 of Section 22C reads as follows:“(7) When a Permanent Lok Adalat, in the aforesaid conciliation proceedings, is of opinion that there exist elements of settlement in such proceedings which may be acceptable to the parties, it may formulate the terms of a possible settlement of the dispute and give to the parties concerned for their observations and in case the parties reach at an agreement on the settlement of the dispute, they shall sign the settlement agreement and the Permanent Lok Adalat shall pass an award in terms thereof and furnish a copy of the same to each of the parties concerned.”
. Sub-sections 7 and 8 of Section 22C cannot be read in isolation as it has reference to Section 22B of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. Section 22B speaks of establishment of Permanent Lok Adalats in respect of one or more public utility services which the state authority shall notify through a notification. What constitute Public Utility Service has been defined in clause (b) of Section 22A of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987.
12. Upon examining the various provisions of the Legal Services Authorities Act, we are of the view that closure of one gate of a hospital by the authorities cannot come under the purview of service in hospital or dispensary. At the cost of repetition, we may reiterate here that service in hospital or dispensary means the services provided with regard to the treatment of the patients and nothing else. There is no allegation any where that the people of Berhampur city or adjoining areas have been denied medical service or treatment in M.K.C.G. 8 Medical College and Hospital or there is any health hazard because of such deficiency in rendering or providing medical assistance to the patients in the hospital. When sub-section 8 of Section 22C is read harmoniously with Section 22B of Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, we have no hesitation in our mind to hold that the Permanent Lok Adalat for Public Utility Services Ganjam-Berhampur could not have entertained the application filed by Sri Bijaya Kumar Patnaik, Advocate. We are constrained to observe that the Chairman and its two members exceeded their jurisdiction in holding that they can decide the dispute as because the conciliation failed with regard to the opening of the western gate of M.K.C.G. Medical College and Hospital. Reasoning assigned by the Permanent Lok Adalat for Public Utility Services Ganjam-Berhampur in our considered view shows that they traded on a wrong path and took upon themselves a jurisdiction which is not vested on them under the statute. When the authorities proclaimed them to be a special tribunal it is equally expected of them that they should function in a manner which the law of the land prescribes. Judicial discipline and propriety has to be maintained especially when the Chairperson of the Permanent Lok Adalat in question is a retired Senior Judicial Officer in the cadre of District Judge. When the authorities are called upon to adjudicate the dispute they must perform their duties in accordance with law and they shall not be swayed away by emotions and feelings of the people. The higher the responsibility the greater is the restraint. One should circumspect while passing any order as public 9 functionaries. We should always remember that we are functioning under public gaze. Let not people loose confidence on our system. Let us preserve the sanctity of the institution. Let majesty of law prevail not personal feelings and emotions. All must function within the “Laxman Rekha”. so that no one can point an accusing finger at our system.
13. Thus, in the instant case when the Permanent Lok Adalat for Public Utility Services Ganjam-Berhampur passed the impugned order at Annexure-1 without jurisdiction, the same is nonest and cannot be allowed to stand for a moment even. In the premises, we have no hesitation to quash the impugned order at Annexure-1 and the order passed for opening of the western gate of M.K.C.G. Medical College and Hospital, Berhampur is resultantly quashed.
14. Accordingly, the writ petition stands allowed. We direct the Registry to send copies of this judgment to all the Courts, Tribunals, Permanent Lok Adalats for Public Utility Services except State Administrative Tribunal and Central Administrative Tribunal for their information and guidance. …………………………………. B.K.Misra,J.V.Gopala Gowda, C.J.I agree. ……………………………………… V.Gopala Gowda,C.,J.Orissa High Court, Cuttack 14th November,2012/ K.K.Sahoo 10