Do any special rules govern the location of a Psychiatric Nursing Home?

Abdul Wahab vs. Municipal Corporation of Vijayawada

Filed under: Section 636 of the Mental Health Act
Appellant: Abdul Wahab
Respondents: Municipal Corporation of Vijayawada and Anr.
Citation: 2004 (3) ALT 473
Court: In the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad
Judge: L. Narasimha Reddy

This is a petition made by Abdul Wahab seeking a writ petition against the Municipal Corporation of Vijayawada directing it not to permit the other respondent to open a Psychiatric Nursing Home in the neighboring premises.

Facts

According to Abdul Wahab, the second respondent had obtained permission to open a Psychiatric Nursing Home in the neighboring premises. He had constructed the nursing home in violation of the provisions of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporations Act and the Mental Health Act of 1987. The second respondent was issued three notices and then they filed a petition challenging the third notice.

Abdul Wahab raised objections on two grounds:

  • The construction being undertaken infringed the sanctioned plan.
  • The second respondent had deviated in the matter of internal partitions.
Thorough examination of the notice indicated that the second respondent had deviated by not leaving open spaces on all four sides. The second respondent did not dispute this and was ready to pay the compounding fee.

Arguments made on behalf of the parties

The argument made on behalf of Abdul was that psychiatric nursing homes cannot be equated with other ordinary nursing homes and therefore they should not be permitted to be constructed in a residential locality.

Observations made by the Court

In the matter of deviations, the Court observed that there were two courses of actions available to the person opening the psychiatric nursing home once he admitted to the deviation.

First, if the deviations had repercussions and cause hardship to the neighbors and public in general, in which case there was no question of allowing it to remain regardless of whether the person concerned was willing to pay the compounding fee or not.

However, if the deviations are trivial then the violators were to be let off with a compounding fee. The Court pointed out that the local authorities, i.e. Vijayawada Municipal Corporation needed to decide this.

With respect to the other complaint, i.e. deviations in inner partitions, the Court observed that structural modification could not be ordered unless it was proved to be harmful to the interests of the neighbors.

Further, in response to Abdul Wahab's point regarding the location of the Psychiatric Nursing Home; the Court observed that such nursing homes could be established only in areas approved by the local authority.

To the argument about not equating psychiatric nursing homes with general nursing homes, the Court stated that the Mental Health Act did not earmark areas for establishing particular categories of nursing homes.

The Court acknowledged that the license clearly stipulated that it was subject to the provisions of the Mental Health Act and therefore Abdul Wahab was free to bring any major deviations or non-compliance to the notice of the Director of Medical Education.

In such cases, necessary action would be taken after verification. The writ petition was thus disposed off directing that it would be open to the second respondent to submit a representation to Vijayawada Municipal Corporation within two weeks regarding the deviations pointed out by Abdul Wahab for verification and necessary action.

Sections Referred:

  • Hyderabad Municipal Corporations Act, 1955 - Section 636
  • Mental Health Act, 1987
  • Mental Health Rules - Rules 16 and 20

Cases Referred:

  • 3 ACES vs. Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad, 1994 (3) ALT 73