1 / 4 2025:CGHC:3814 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 445 of 2025 1 - Samta Hospital Through Its Sole Proprietor Narendra Kumar Sahu, Aged About 61 Years, S/o Late Gopal Ram Sahu, Registered Address- Village Ghotiya, Taluk- Dondi Lohara, District Balod, Chhattisgarh. 491228 ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Health And Family Welfare Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Director, Health Services Cum Chief Executive Officer, State Nodal Agency, Directorate Health Services, Swastha Bhawan, 4th Floor, North Block, Sector- 19, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Deputy Director, State Nodal Agency, Directorate Health And Family Welfare, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Chief Medical And Health Officer, District Balod, Chhattisgarh. 5 – Collector, Balod City, District Balod, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) 2 / 4 For Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra Pali, Advocate For Respondents/ State : Mr. Satish Gupta, Govt. Advocate (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE BIBHU DATTA GURU) Order on Board 22/01/2025 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner is questioning the order dated 08/10/2024, by which, the respondent No.2 passed an order de-empanelled the petitioner from providing treatment to patients under the government health schemes and barred from fresh registration for patient for treatment under the schemes namely Dr. Khubchand Baghel Swasthya Sahayata Yojna and Ayushmaan Bharat Pradhanmantri Jan Arogya Yojna. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the impugned action of de-empanelment has been taken by the respondent No.2 on the basis of an audit report, even which has not been mentioned in the impugned order, however, in the show cause notice, though the respondents have mentioned about the audit report but no copy of the said audit report was provided to the petitioner. He further submits that in pursuance of show cause notice, the petitioner has submitted a detail reply on 21/08/2024. Annexure P-9 through e-mail and hard copy given to the CMHO on 22/08/2024 (Annexure P-10), however, without considering the same and without providing the copy of the audit report, by a non- speaking and unreasoned order, the decision for de-empaneling the petitioner from providing treatment to patient under the government health scheme has been taken. Hence, the order impugned has been passed in violation of the principles of natural 3 / 4 justice. Learned counsel for the petitioner by referring the government health scheme Annexure P-11, in Clause-12, submits that there is a provision prescribed for disciplinary action against the hospital under the said scheme, but the respondent failed to follow the same and passed the impugned order. 3. Learned counsel for the State/respondent submits the order Annexure P-1 has been passed by the respondent No.2/Director by observing that the reply to the show cause notice issued to the petitioner was not submitted, which has been reflected in the order itself, hence the order dated 08/10/2024 is just and proper. 4. I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the order Annexure P-1 dated 08/10/2024. 5. From perusal of record, the petitioner has submitted a detailed reply to the show cause notice, however, the impugned order dated 08/10/2024 de-empanelling the petitioner for providing treatment to patients under the government health scheme has been passed and also debarred the petitioner from fresh registration for patients for treatment under the government health schemes without considering the reply submitted by the petitioner. The impugned order appears to be a non-speaking and unreasoned order, there is no consideration of petitioner’s reply to the show cause notice, even it does not appear from the order whether any explanation sought from the petitioner about the audit report by providing a copy of the said audit report to the petitioner, hence, the order impugned dated 08/10/2024 has been passed in clear violation of the principles of natural justice, which 4 / 4 is non-speaking and unreasoned order, the same is liable to be and is hereby quashed, however, liberty is reserved to the respondents to take a fresh action by issuance of a fresh show cause notice along with audit report on the basis of which the action has been proposed. Moreover, the respondents shall follow the procedure prescribed under the Clause 12 of the government health scheme Annexure P-11. 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition is allowed to the above extent. Sd/- (BIBHU DATTA GURU) JUDGE $. Bhilwar