BIJAYINI CHARITABLE HOMEOPATHIC DISPENSARY Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ms. Mohapatra, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, State be compelled to take over and run her client's free homeopathic dispensary. She submits, impugned is communication dtd. 24/2/2016, by which the authority rejected application of her client for the dispensary being taken over by the State. She wants to rely on disclosures in the counter to show that State has a policy for taking over such dispensaries. Mr. Panda, learned advocate, Additional Government Advocate appears on behalf of State and files copy of the counter, since it is not available in the record.

(2.) Ms. Mohapatra refers to annexure B/3 in the counter to submit, unreasonable criteria were set by the government, not applicable to itself in the matter of running dispensaries. Her client's dispensary is in remote area situated over 10 decimals of land donated by a villager. Under letter dtd. 23/2/2000 (annexure B/3) the requirement for charitable dispensation for eligibility to be taken over by the government is for it to have minimum 50 decimals of land. She draws attention to annexure-13 in the writ petition to demonstrate that the government itself established similar dispensaries having 0.05 and 0.06 decimals of lands. She then relies on inspection report dtd. 18/4/2013 (page 15 of the counter) to submit, the District Homeopathy Medical Officer, Mayurbhanj under instruction of the Collector and District Magistrate had made inspection. A part of the report is reproduced below.

(3.) Adjournment is granted for State to take instruction. The writ petition will be dealt with on adjourned date or thereafter. Article 14 in the Constitution says, inter alia, State shall not deny to any person equality before the law.