REV FR ANTONY Vs. HEALTH INSPECTOR
LAWS(KER)-1963-11-13
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Decided on November 18,1963

REV. FR. ANTONY Appellant
VERSUS
HEALTH INSPECTOR Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

THE QUEEN V. PARLBY [REFERRED TO]
COMISSIONER OF POLICE BOMBAY VS. GORDHANDAS BHANJI [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

ST. JOSEPHS CHURCH, POONKUNNAM VS. VELU [LAWS(KER)-1988-7-74] [REFERRED TO]
ST. MARYS ORTHODOX CHURCH VS. THANKAMANI RAJAN [LAWS(KER)-2015-10-235] [REFERRED TO]
SALEAM MARTHOMA CHURCH VS. PAPPACHAN BIJI [LAWS(KER)-2017-2-56] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)THIS is a petition by the Vicar of the St. Francis assisi Church, Thykal, in the Sherthallay Taluk. The petition questions the validity of Ext. P-1, an order of the 1st respondent dated 30-5-1963, and prays for a writ of certiorari quashing the said order under Art. 226 of the constitution. .
(2.)THE 1st respondent is the Health Officer of the sherthallay Taluk. THE 2nd respondent is the State of Kerala represented by the chief Secretary to Government, Trivandrum. Respondents 3 to 7 were brought on record in pursuance of the order in C. M. P. No. 7015 of 1963. THEy are persons interested in supporting the order.
The statute under which Ext. P-1 was issued is stated therein as the Travancore Public Health Act, 1121. Ext. P-1 is in a printed form and space is available therein for inserting the relevant section of the act. That space was left unfilled. It is common ground that the Travancore public Health Act, 1121, was not in force when Ext. P-1 was issued.

On 20-6-1963 the Health Officer-the successor to the officer who issued Ext. P-1-addressed the District Medical Officer of Health, alleppey, as follows: "i am enclosing herewith a copy of each of the prohibitory notice dated 30 51963 and the letter dated 17-6-1965 from Rev. Fr. Dennis Arasarkavil received under registered cover. In the above letter it has been stated that the prohibitory notice dated 30 51963 served on the petitioner was issued under Act hi of 1121 and is not in order as the said Act is already repealed vide S. 162 of Travancore-Cochin Public Health Act XVI of 1955. But in the office copy of the said notice copy enclosed) the year 1121 printed has been corrected to read as 1955. It is not known whether the original has been corrected or not. From the above letter it is evident that it was issued under the repealed Act. As such I think that the said notice served has to be cancelled and a fresh notice has to be issued under the Act now in force XVI of 1955. I would like to know whether it would be legal if I issue a fresh notice cancelling the one already issued by my predecessor. Request early orders in the matter. " (Ext. P-2) The reply of the District Medical Officer of Health is contained in a memo dated 25 61963. That memo reads as follows: "the Health Inspector, Sherthallay will notify the parish Priest, St. Francis Assisi Church, Thykal. that the prohibitory notice served on him was on the strength of the Public Health Act of 1955 and not on the Act of 1121 and that if the notice on the printed form already served on him had not been suitably modified by substituting '1955' instead of the printed matter'1121', the same may be treated as modified and read as '1955' instead of 1121'. " (Ext. P-3 ).

(3.)IN compliance with the memo the Health Officer wrote to Rev. Fr. Dennis Arasarkadavil on 26- 61963. That letter was in the following terms: "you are hereby requested to note that the prohibitory notice served on you on 30 51963 from this office was on the strength of the Public Health Act of 1955 and not on the Act of 1121 and that if the notice on the printed form already served on you had not been suitably modified by substituting '1955' instead of the printed matter '1121' the same may be treated as modified and read as '1955' instead of '1121'. " (Ext. P-4)
Ext. P 1 reads as follows: 6 A. The Deputy Director of Health Services seems to have conducted " the local inspection in accordance with the oral directions of the Director of Health Services. This fact is mentioned in the Deputy director's report to the Director dated 20 51963. That report [ext. P-5] concludes with the statement that he was of the opinion that the location of the cemetery at the site concerned was objectionable "from the public health point of view".

;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.