Court holds that Municipal Corporation lacks statutory power to seal nursing homes licensed under Nursing Home Act, 2010; any such action without due process is illegal and void
In a significant ruling delivered on September 22, 2026, the Chhattisgarh High Court struck down the action of the Municipal Corporation, Durg, which had sealed the Agrawal Nursing Home citing alleged irregularities and non-compliance with Bio-Medical Waste Management Rules. The Court held that the Municipal Corporation had no statutory authority to seal the nursing home and emphasized that the power to suspend or cancel licenses under the Chhattisgarh State Upcharyagriha Tatha Rogopchar Sambandhi Sthapanaye Anugyapan Adhiniyam, 2010 (Nursing Home Act, 2010) exclusively vests with the Supervisory Authority, identified as the District Collector under the 2013 Rules.
The petitioner, Dr. Shyama Agrawal, challenged the sealing notice dated December 15, 2022, issued by the Municipal Commissioner, arguing that the nursing home was lawfully operating under a valid license granted under Section 6 of the Nursing Home Act, 2010. The petitioner contended that the Municipal Corporation's action was without jurisdiction, violated procedural safeguards, and infringed on her fundamental right to carry on trade and business under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.
The Municipal Corporation justified its action on grounds of non-compliance with Bio-Medical Waste Management Rules and alleged expired permissions. However, the Court found that the Municipal Corporation did not possess any power under the statutory scheme to regulate, revoke, or seal the nursing home. The Court observed that Section 9 of the Act mandates that the Supervisory Authority must issue a 30-day notice specifying grounds, provide an opportunity for a personal hearing, and pass a reasoned speaking order before any cancellation or suspension of license.
The Court reiterated that under Rule 3 of the Nursing Home Rules, 2013, the District Collector is the designated Supervisory Authority. It underscored that any action by an authority lacking jurisdiction is a nullity and cannot be sustained, referring to precedents including a coordinate bench decision in E.S. Beena v. State of Chhattisgarh and the Supreme Court's ruling in Bilkis Yakub Rasool v. Union of India.
Highlighting the principle of jurisdictional competence, the Court quashed the impugned sealing notice and directed that the petitioner remains bound by statutory compliance requirements and judicial directions. The Court further clarified that only the competent authority may take adverse action following due process, thereby protecting the petitioner's lawful rights.
This judgment reinforces the statutory scheme protecting licensed nursing homes from unauthorized interference by municipal bodies and underscores the necessity of adherence to prescribed procedures before license suspension or cancellation.
Bottom Line:
Nursing Home Act, 2010 - Municipal Corporation has no statutory power to seal a nursing home licensed under the Act - Power to cancel or suspend licence vests exclusively in the Supervisory Authority, i.e. District Collector - Any action by an authority lacking jurisdiction is a nullity and liable to be quashed.
Statutory provision(s):
Chhattisgarh State Upcharyagriha Tatha Rogopchar Sambandhi Sthapanaye Anugyapan Adhiniyam, 2010 Sections 6, 9; Chhattisgarh State Upcharyagriha Tatha Rogopchar Sambandhi Sthapanaye Anugyapan Niyam, 2013 Rule 3; Constitution of India Article 19(1)(g)
Dr. Shyama Agrawal v. State of Chhattisgarh, (Chhattisgarh) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2991108
