ITEM NO.1                   COURT NO.1                 SECTION XVIA

             S U P R E M E   C O U R T   O F   I N D I A                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS                        

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).10361/2006

(From the judgement and order dated 19/04/2006 and 29.5.2006 in   OWP No. 60/2006 & OWP No. 112/2006  of The HIGH COURT OF  J & K AT JAMMU)

AASTHA DIAGNOSTIC CLINICAL LAB. & ORS.                   Petitioner(s)

                       VERSUS

STATE OF J&K & ORS.                                      Respondent(s)

(With prayer for interim relief and office report)(For final  disposal) WITH SLP(C) NO. 10499 of 2006,SLP(C) NO. 12441 of 2006 (With  appln.  for  directions and permission to file  rejoinder  affidavit  and prayer  for interim relief and office report)(For final disposal) SLP(C) NO. 1242 of 2007,SLP(C) NO. 14344 of 2006 SLP(C) NO. 14345 of 2006,SLP(C) NO. 15584 of 2006 (With appln. for exemption from filing c/c of the impugned order and c/delay in filing SLP and prayer for interim relief and office report) (For final disposal) SLP(C) NO. 13087 of 2006,SLP(C) NO. 13761 of 2006 SLP(C) NO. 13737 of 2006 (With prayer for interim relief and office report ) (For final disposal) SLP(C) NO. 14296 of 2006 (With appln. for exemption from filing c/c of the impugned order  and and prayer for interim relief and office report) (For final disposal)

Date: 29/01/2009  These Petitions were called on for hearing today.

CORAM :         HON'BLE  THE CHIEF JUSTICE         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. SATHASIVAM         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.M. PANCHAL

For Petitioner(s) Mr. V. Hazarika, Adv. Mr. Indrajeet Gupta, Adv. Ms. S. Hazarika, Adv. Ms. D. Phooban, Adv. For Ms. Sumita Hazarika,Adv.

-2-

Mr. Milind Kumar, Adv. Mr. Mukul Kumar, Adv. Ms. Charu Mathur, Adv.

                 For Mr. P.D. Sharma, Adv.

Ms. Shiva Lakshmi, Adv.                   For Mr. T. Mahipal, Adv.

                 Mr.Sunil Kumar Verma, Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. Anis Suhrawardy Mr. Tabrez Ahmad, Adv.

          UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following                                O R D E R  

Leave granted.

The appeals are disposed of in terms of the signed  

order.

(R.K.DHAWAN) (VEERA VERMA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

(Signed order is placed on the file)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL  APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.499  OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.10361 of 2006)

AASTHA DIAGNOSTIC CLINICAL LAB.& ORS. ...APPELLANTS.

VERSUS

STATE OF J&K AND ORS. ...RESPONDENTS.

WITH C.A.NO.500 OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.13737/2006)  C.A.NO.501 OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.10499/2006)  C.A.NO.502 OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.15584/2006)  C.A.NO.503 OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.12441/2006)  C.A.NO.504 OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.13087/2006)  C.A.NO.505 OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.13761/2006)  C.A.NO.506 OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.14344/2006)  C.A.NO.507 OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.14345/2006)  C.A.NO.508 OF 2009

(Arising out of SLP(C) No.1242/2007)  C.A.NO.509 OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.14296/2006)  

O R D E R

Leave granted.

The appellants before us are running hospitals/clinics and diagnostic

centres in the State of Jammu and Kashmir.  In a public interest litigation

filed before the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir, the  Division  Bench  of the

High Court gave  

-2-

certain directions regarding basic  infrastructure facilities which are  to be

provided in the hospitals and other clinical establishments.  The petitioner in

the public interest litigation  alleged that many of the hospitals in the State

of

Jammu and Kashmir are not having adequate facilities and State Authorities

are  not  taking  care  to  insist  that  basic  facilities  should  be  there  in  the

hospitals.  It is alleged that licenses are issued for running these type of

institutions without being any proper guidelines and requested  the High

Court  to issue appropriate  guidelines.   The High Court  considered  these

matters and directed the Chief Secretary of the State of Jammu and Kashmir

to  constitute  a  committee  to  be  headed  by  Principal  Secretary  to

Government, Health and Medical Education Department and comprising of

two Principals,  Government Medical  Colleges at Srinagar and Jammu; two

Principals  of  Government  Dental  Colleges  at  Srinagar  and  Jammu;  two

Directors  of  Health  Services  of  Kashmir  and  Jammu  Provinces;  Director,

Sher-i-Kashmir  Institute  of  Medical  Sciences,  Soura,  Srinagar  and  Chief

Engineer of UEED, and the committee was directed to evolve and formulate

suitable criteria/norms for registration of private hospitals/nursing homes

and clinical establishments/laboratories.  The Committee submitted a report

and also  opined  that  the  norms  should  be  established   for    hospitals,

clinics,  nursing  homes  and  

-3-

diagnostic centres.   This was approved by the Government and issued in the

Form – Norms for Registration & Licensing of Nursing Homes and Clinical

Establishments-2006.   The  hospitals  were  divided  into  two  categories  –

nursing homes upto 25 beds and nursing homes above 25 beds.  Detailed

guidelines have been given regarding the various facilities that are to be

made available to the patients.  The present appellants before us who are

running hospitals/nursing homes/clinics have already been given licenses by

the Government.

The  learned  counsel  appearing  for  the  appellants  contended

before us that these appellants are running these institutions for the last

several years and some of them are situated within the city limits of Jammu

and Srinagar and it is difficult for them to acquire more space to provide

these facilities.   It  is  also contended that  if  these additional facilities are

provided, the expenses for health care itself will go up and ordinary citizens

will not be able to avail  the benefits of these private hospitals.  It is also

argued  that  these  sophisticated  facilities  could  be  provided  only  by  few

private hospitals which has got enormous economic power and appellants

would not be in a position to give all these facilities.

Learned counsel  appearing for the State contended that these

guidelines have been issued after considering all relevant facts and they are

basically essential for providing  

-4-

the health care to the citizens of the State.  It is also argued that if any of the

hospitals/clinics or other centres do not have these facilities they can seek

exemption upto 25% as provided in the guidelines.

Our attention was drawn to the various parameters which are

laid down in the guidelines.  Care has been taken to provide facilities to the

patients by the health care units.   We do not think that these norms are

violative of any rights of the appellants.  However, we have noticed that all

these hospitals/clinics and other centres had been in existence for fairly a

long period and they had started these units under proper license on the

basis  of   the then  existing  rules.   The  hospitals    owned  by  these

appellants are lacking any of the facilities which are to be provided as per

the new guidelines,  they are to be given six months time to update the

facilities in accordance with the norms laid down by the Government.  If any

structure or alteration is required for hospital/building, the appellants be

given  one  year  time  to  comply  with  it.   If  the  appellants  are  seeking

exemption of the guidelines or modification, they may file proper application

to the Director of  Health Services  and it  is  for  the  Director  of   Health

Services to consider the individual  

-5-

application  and  on  hearing  the  appellants  may  pass  appropriate  orders

regarding 25% exemption permissible as per the guidelines.

The appeals are disposed of accordingly.  

                 ...................CJI    (K.G. BALAKRISHNAN)

             .....................J    (P. SATHASIVAM

             .....................J    (J.M. PANCHAL)

NEW DELHI;    JANUARY 29, 2009.