[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Dr. Mruyunjaya C. Sindhur vs The Health Officer on 2 April, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:4958
WP No. 103986 of 2016
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF APRIL, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M
WRIT PETITION NO. 103986 OF 2016 (LB-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. DR. MRUTYUNJAYA C. SINDHUR
AGE:ABOUT 45 YEARS,
OCC:PROFESSION/ DOCTOR
SINDHUR HOSPITAL
VIDYANAGAR, HUBBALLI
PIN CODE:5800021
2. DR. SUNIL K. JITURI
AGE: ABOUT 44 YEARS,
OCC:PROFESSION/DOCTOR
JITURI HOSPITAL
HOSUR, HUBBALLI-5800021
Digitally signed by
CHANDRASHEKAR
LAXMAN
...PETITIONERS
KATTIMANI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
(BY SRI. M. M. PATIL, ADVOCATE)
KARNATAKA
AND:
1. THE HEALTH OFFICER
HUBLI-DHARWAD
CORPORATION
HUBBALLI-580020
2. THE COMMISSIONER
HUBLI-DHARWAD
CORPORATION
HUBBALLI-580020
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:4958
WP No. 103986 of 2016
HC-KAR
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISIONER
AND THE REGISTRATION CHAIRMAN,
FOR THE KARNATAKA PRIVATE
MEDICAL ESTABLISHMENTS,
DHARWAD DISTRICT, DHARWAD-580001
4. THE DIRECTOR OF MUNCIPAL ADMINISTRATION,
9TH and 10TH FLOOR V.V.TOWER,
DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BANGALURU-560001.
5. THE INDIAN MEDICAL COUNCIL,
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY,
POCKET NO:14 SECTOR NO.8,
DWARKA, PHASE.1,
NEW DELHI-110077.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. G.I.GACHCHINAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2;
SRI.P.N.HATTI, HCGP FOR R3 AND R4;
NOTICE TO R5 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN
RELIEFS.
THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS
UNDER:
ORAL ORDER
Sri.M.M.Patil., counsel for the petitioners,
Sri.G.I.Gachchinamath., counsel for respondents 1 and 2 and
Sri.P.N.Hatti., HCGP for respondents 3 and 4 have appeared in
person.
NC: 2026:KHC-D:4958
HC-KAR
2. The Writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs.
a) Struck down Schedule X appended to Section
353 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation
Act, 1976, so far as it relates to hospital is
concerned in the above schedule and
insisting the licence to the doctors as per
Section 353 of the Act, as it is violative of
Art-14 and 19(g) and 21 of the Constitution
of India.
b) Pass such other order or direction, this
Hon'ble Court deems fit in the circumstance
of the case."
3. The present writ petition is filed by the petitioners
seeking to strike down Schedule X appended to Section 353 of
the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976, insofar as it
relates to hospitals, and the requirement of obtaining a licence
by doctors under Section 353 of the said Act, on the ground that
the same is violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21 of the
Constitution of India.
It is the case of the petitioners that an Email
representation was submitted to the respondent-Corporation,
placing reliance on a decision of the Bombay High Court. In
response to the said email dated 17.11.2014, the Hubli-Dharwad
NC: 2026:KHC-D:4958
HC-KAR
Municipal Corporation informed the petitioners that the said
decision does not apply in the State of Karnataka.
4. The said communication is only in the nature of a
reply to the petitioners' Email. A careful perusal of the same
indicates that the Corporation has not issued any direction or
taken any coercive steps insisting upon the petitioners to obtain
a licence under Section 353 of the Act.
5. The grievance of the petitioners is based merely on
an apprehension that the respondent - Corporation may insist
upon obtaining such a licence. However, the communication
placed on record does not substantiate such apprehension.
In the absence of any concrete action or enforceable
demand made by the respondent, the challenge to the validity of
Schedule X to Section 353 of the Act is premature and not
maintainable at this stage.
This Court is of the considered opinion that the writ
petition is devoid of merit. Accordingly, this Court passed the
following:
NC: 2026:KHC-D:4958
HC-KAR
ORDER
The writ petition is hereby dismissed.
Sd/-
(JYOTI M)
JUDGE
AM/-
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33
