MAHANTH BISHWAMBHAR KUMAR DAS Vs. STATEOF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There are as many as 56 petitioners in the instant writ petition, some of whom are residents of the locality and some are employees of the Hospital owned, possessed and managed by the Managing Committee of the Trust, of which petitioner No. 1 is a trustee. The petitioners have prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus or any other suitable writ/order or direction commanding the respondents to take over the Mahanth Darshan Das Hospital with all its rights, libilities, appurtenances as well as the services of the existing staff under the provision of the Provincialisation of Roads and Hospitals Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The State of Bihar has opposed this writ application and has pleaded that the Government of Bihar do not propose to take over this Hospital.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the State of Bihar cannot now take the plea that it is not interested in taking over the said Hospital having regard to the following facts : (i) The noting in the office file would show that an order has already been issued for taking over the College after Cabinet approval, (ii) The Board of Control of Shri Krishna Medical College and Hospital, Muzaffarpur had made an arrangement with the College in question for imparting training to its students in Rural Health and Preventive Medicine. The College having taken advantage of this arrangement, the State Government cannot back out from the promise made as that would amount to approbating and reprobating, which is not permissible under the law. (iii) The facts of this case would establish that there was a promise made by the State Government to take over the Hospital pursuant to which the Trust had acted. Therefore, on the principle of promissory estoppel, the State Government is prevented from refusing to take over the Hospital.

(3.) The Provincialisation of Roads and Hospitals Act, 1947, no doubt, vests in the State Government the power to take over by notification, with effect from such date as may be specified therein, any hospital or road which is vested in, or is under the control or administration of the Commissioners of any Municipality, any District Board or any person or trustee etc. and such hospital, if taken over, shall be vested in the State Government subject to the provisions of Section 6 of the Act, which provides for payment of compensation. The proviso of Section 3 provides that nothing in this sub-section shall be deemed to apply to any hospital, which is vested in, or is under the control or administration of any religious or philanthropic mission. Section 4 further provides that all endowments or funds which appertained to, or were appropriated specifically for the purposes of any hospital, immediately before it was vested in the State Government under Section 3, shall be vested in the State Government for those purposes, and continue to be applied to the same purposes as those to which they were lawfully applicable immediately before the date when the endowment or fund concerned was so vested.