Research › Browse › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

1992 DIGILAW 556 (MAD)

G. Neduncheziyan v. The State of Tamil Nadu, represented by the Secretary to Government

1992-11-10

SRINIVASAN

body1992
Judgment :- 1. In this writ petition, the establishment of a primary health centre at Irumbulikurichi village by the respondents is challenged on the ground that there is already a primary health centre functioning in Kumiliyam village. The petitioner in the writ petition is the President of the Panchayat of Kumiliyam village. It is stated in the affidavit that Kumiliyam village is situated within the distance of 1 k.m. from Irumbulikurichi and as per the conditions prescribed by the respondents, a health centre shall not be established within such a short distance. 2. Reliance is placed on the conditions prescribed by the Government for establishment of primary health centres. One of the conditions is that there shall be no medical facility within a distance of 8 kms radius. The other conditions relate to the population in the Panchayat Union as well as the village and the donation to be made by the villagers and a gift of land of 5 acres. In so far as Irumbulikurichi is concerned, all the other conditions are satisfied and there is no dispute with regard to the same. According to the petitioner, as Irumbulikurichi is situated within 1 km. from Kumiliyam and as there is already a medical centre functioning at Kumiliyam, there shall not be another health centre in Irumbulikurichi. There is a fallacy in this argument. The relevant G.O. itself provides that if the population in the Panchayat Union warrants establishment of additional health centres, such centres can be established on the basis of one centre for 30,000 people. In this case the petitioner has not stated anything about the population in the Panchayat union. If the Panchayat Union has more than 30,000 people, there can be more than one health centre and the rule that there shall not be any medical facility in a radius of 8 kms will not affect the same. The condition prescribed in the relevant G.O. should be read together and harmonious construction should be given. In the present case as there is nothing on record to show that the population of the Panchayat Union does not warrant establishment of additional health centre, it is not possible to accept the contention of the petitioner that just because the village of Kumiliyam is situated within one kilometre from the village of Irumbulikurichi, there shall not be a health centre at Irumbulikurichi. 3. 3. Apart from that the condition with regard to the absence of medical facility centre within a radius of 8 kms. is only a condition relating to eligibility of a village. This is not an absolute condition which prevents the authorities or the respondents from establishing an additional health centre if the circumstances of the case warrant the same. If the conditions in the village warrant the establishment of another health centre, there is nothing which prevents the respondents from establishing such a centre within a distance of 1. k.m. from the already existing centre. 4. The petitioner has no right whatever to maintain a writ petition challenging the establishment of another health centre. Health centres are intended for the benefit of the residents of the village. It is a welfare measure introduced by the Government. It is not like a business being done by the health centres. Even in cases of business it has been held by the Apex court that rival businessmen cannot challenge the issue of licences to other businessmen in the area. In the present case nothing has been made out by the petitioner as to how he is aggrieved by the establishment of another health centre to serve the needs of the people in the locality. 5. There is absolutely no merit whatever in the writ petition. It has to fail. It is unfortunate that a person who is the President of a village panchayat should indulge in this kind of litigation challenging a welfare measure being introduced in the adjacent village. 6. The writ petition is dismissed with costs. The counsels fee would be Rs. 750/-. The petitioner shall pay it from his personal account and shall not charge it on the panchayat.