HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 26304 of 2025 Court No. - 39 HON'BLE ARINDAM SINHA, J. HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J. 1. Mr. Harish Kumar Srivastava, learned advocate appearing on behalf of petitioner had moved the writ petition on 21st August, 2025. He submitted, his client's hospital had been sealed. It was done illegally inasmuch as no order of cancellation of registration had been supplied to his client. He had relied on sections 32 and 33 of Chemical Establishments (Registration and Regulation) Act, 2010 to submit, neither notice was issued on cancellation nor any enquiry made nor, on reports based on enquiry, views of his client obtained. 2. Mr. G.C. Tiwari, learned advocate, Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of State had also appeared. Paragraph-2 from order dated 21st August, 2025 is reproduced below. "2. Sri Girish Chandra Tiwari, learned advocate Additional Chief Standing Counsel appears on behalf of State and seeks adjournment for obtaining instructions. There must be disclosure on authority for sealing petitioner's clinical establishment, by way of an affidavit to be accepted on adjourned date on advance copy served." State filed affidavit dated 3rd September, 2025 and petitioner, objection thereto by affidavit dated 8th September, 2025. 3. Today, on behalf of State reliance is placed on paragraphs 6 to 10 in its affidavit dated 3rd September, 2025. Those paragraphs have not been dealt with by petitioner, in his objection. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anand Kumar Singh, Harish Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Sukh Dev Raghav .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) 4. The police on registering FIR, consequent to death of a person admitted in petitioner's hospital, had sealed it for purpose of investigation. Acting on report of the police, the Chief Medical Officer (CMO) subsequently issued sealing order dated 23rd April, 2025. On query Mr. Tiwari relies on paragraph-10 in the affidavit and reiterates, the hospital needs to remain sealed for purpose of investigation. 5. Section 32 in the Act of 2010 provides for cancellation of registration. The provision precedes section 33 providing for inspection of a registered clinical establishment. On the facts and in the circumstances, we are not inclined to interfere with satisfaction of the CMO, to have passed order dated 23rd April, 2025 for sealing the hospital. The officer had report from the police in respect of their inspection made and the establishment sealed. In this case, satisfaction of the CMO has preceded otherwise information had, for inspection of the establishment as under the Act of 2010. On query Mr. Tiwari submits, petitioner can approach the Additional Director. 6. In view of aforesaid, no further order needs be made. 7. The writ petition is disposed of. September 12, 2025 Ashutosh WRIC No. 26304 of 2025 2 (Arindam Sinha, J.) (Avnish Saxena, J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad