[2025:RJ-JP:48859-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1344/2025 Life Care Hospital, Kothawda Mod, Chaksu, District Jaipur Through Its Director, Irfan Mohammad Son Of Shri Abdul Rashid, Aged About 39 Years, Resident Of Ward No. 3, Chaksu, District Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Appellant Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary, Medical And Health Department, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. The Director, Medical And Health Department, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 3. Chief Medical Health Officer, Jaipur-Ii, Mini Swasthya Bhawan, Sethi Colony, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr.Tanveer Ahamad For Respondent(s) : Mr.Vigyan Shah, AAG with Ms.Pragya Seth HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI CHIRANIA Order 02/12/2025 1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant challenging the order dated 07.11.2025 passed by learned Single Judge in S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.15845/2025 titled as Life Care Hospital Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed. 2. Brief facts of the case are that a show cause notice was given by the respondents to the appellant on 03.10.2025 under [2025:RJ-JP:48859-DB] (2 of 3) [SAW-1344/2025] Section 32 of the Clinical Establishments (Registration and Regulation) Act, 2010 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act of 2010'), providing three days' time to the appellant for submitting its explanation. In reply thereto, the appellant tried to send reply via E-mail but due to some technical glitch, the reply could not reach to the respondents and again on 08.10.2025, the appellant submitted reply to the said show cause notice, which was duly received by the respondent. 3. Grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents have proceeded without considering the reply and passed the impugned order dated 08.10.2025, whereby registration of the appellant- hospital was cancelled. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the respondents have cancelled license of the appellant-hospital vide order dated 08.10.2025 without considering the reply filed by them. Learned counsel further submits that action of the respondents in cancellation of license of the appellant is in violation of principle of natural justice. 5. Learned Additional Advocate General Mr.Vigyan Shah appearing on behalf of the respondent-State submits that the respondents have acted in accordance with the provisions of Act of 2010. Learned AAG further submits that the appellant is having the remedy of appeal against the impugned order before the Appellate Authority and prayed for dismissal of the appeal. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7. The appeal filed on behalf of the appellant is allowed for the reasons that the reply filed on his behalf was not considered by [2025:RJ-JP:48859-DB] (3 of 3) [SAW-1344/2025] the respondents, despite the fact that the same was received in the office of the respondents prior to passing of the order dated 08.10.2025. 8. In that view of the matter, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 08.10.2025 is set aside. The respondents are directed to pass a fresh order after considering the reply submitted by the appellant-hospital. 9. All pending applications stand disposed of. (RAVI CHIRANIA),J (INDERJEET SINGH),J Monika/77