DR. MANOJ LAMBA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.
LAWS(P&H)-2011-5-204
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on May 05,2011

Dr. Manoj Lamba Appellant
VERSUS
State Of Haryana And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Ranjit Singh Sarkaria, J. - (1.) BEING aggrieved against the order sealing mobile ultrasound machine of the Petitioner, he has filed this writ petition to challenge the said order passed on 8.12.2010. As per the Petitioner, this order is illegal and is effecting his working as a Doctor.
(2.) THE Petitioner has been granted licence for use of mobile ultrasound machine. On an inspection, it was observed that the machine was kept in Almirah under lock in room of the hospital instead of the place, where it was required to be kept. The letter, authorising the use of machine by the Petitioner, contains various conditions like the machine can not be removed from the vehicle and the vehicle has to be used as a genetic clinic. The Petitioner had earlier filed an appeal before Director General of Health Services, Haryana. During this time, raid was conducted on the clinic of the Petitioner registered as 'Vaid Sadhu Ram Memorial Hospital, Babain. The Petitioner thereafter was issued notice and the machine in question was sealed. In response to notice issued in the writ petition, it is pointed out that the petition is pre -mature and as such, not maintainable. Giving details of the factual background, it is stated that team comprising of Dr. K.K. Sharma, Deputy Civil Surgeon, Dr. N.K. Jhamb, Deputy Civil Surgeon and Sh.R.K. Harna, Senior Drugs Control Officer, Kurukshetra, was constituted for inspection. The said team had conducted a raid on the genetic clinic registered in the name of the Petitioner, where this ultrasound machine was initially installed. During the raid, the machine was not found in the genetic clinic/room, where it was initially installed. Sign board of x -ray and ultrasound room was displayed. On enquiry, the machine was found lying locked in almirah in another room. Dr. Pawan Kumar Sharma opened the lock of said almirah and the ultrasound machine was lying in said almirah. It is, therefore, alleged that the Petitioner has challenged the place of ultrasound machine without intimation to the appropriate authority, which is in violation of Rule 13 the Preconception and Pre -natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 , which is as under: Intimation of change in employees, place or equipment -Every [Genetic counseling centre, Genetic Laboratory, Ultrasound Clinic and imaging Centre] shall intimate every change of employee, place, address and equipment installed, to the appropriate authority with in a period of thirty days of such change.
(3.) THE sealing of the machine has, thus, been justified.;


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