Using Residential Premises To Provide Free Lodging Services To Cancer Patients, Parents Not Hospital Activity: Karnataka High Court
Justice Suraj Govindaraj of the Karnataka High Court recently quashed a notice issued by Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) to a non-profit organization providing supportive care, including free lodging services, to children undergoing cancer treatment and their parents.The notice, which was issued to non-profit organization "Access Life Assistance Foundation" on the basis of a...
Justice Suraj Govindaraj of the Karnataka High Court recently quashed a notice issued by Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) to a non-profit organization providing supportive care, including free lodging services, to children undergoing cancer treatment and their parents.
The notice, which was issued to non-profit organization "Access Life Assistance Foundation" on the basis of a complaint received from certain neighbors, stated that it was using residential premises as cancer hospital and the same was impermissible without necessary trade license or otherwise.
The petitioner-organization filed the petition claiming that it is a non-profit organization registered as a company, providing multi-disciplinary supportive care to families who come for treatment of their children for cancer. These care facilities also include free of cost temporary accommodation, since such children are not in-patients.
On preliminary hearing, the court had issued notice and directed that an inspection of the premises be carried out, as well as photographs and videos be placed on record, so that the aspect of whether or not any hospital activity was being carried at the premises could be verified.
On going through the status report filed, the Bench said, “...the premises in question is being used only as a housing and lodging facility for cancer affected children, and their parents or guardians and there is no machinery, equipment, or other facilities available in the premises for treatment to children and that no such treatment has been provided in the premises.”
It observed that the photographs did not indicate any equipment in the property, and concluded,
“I am of the considered opinion that the notice which had been issued by the respondents claiming that the premises have been used for running a hospital cannot be sustained.”
While allowing the petition, the court remarked that, “...usage of the premises for residential or lodging purposes without charging any fees from the persons undergoing treatment and their family members cannot be said to be an hospital activity.”
Advocate R. Ranganatha Reddy appeared for petitioners
Advocate K.S. Mallikarjun Reddy appeared for respondents
Case Title: Dr. C. Vishwanath Reddy & Another v. The Commissioner BBMP & Another, Writ Petition No. 21639/2023
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 455