Loading...
A quasi-judicial body (Mental Health Review Board) has dismissed a petition and issued a 'final order' without conducting a scheduled cross-examination of the respondent. Sec 83 of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 provides an option of appeal to the HC. Under this scenario, what should the petitioner do? File a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal or file a Writ Petition as there is a gross violation of principles of natural justice? Please clarify. The major ground of the case amidst other procedural violations is denial of cross-examination which is a serious error on the side of the MHRB. When an appeal is filed, who defends the case, whether it is the counsel of the Board (the quasi-judicial body) or the medical practioners? Is it necessary to include the practioners names as respondents because the appeal is against the board's procedural lapses?
File an appeal under Section 83 of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 before the High Court first, because it is the specific legal remedy. In that appeal, clearly argue that denying cross-examination violates natural justice. Make the Mental Health Review Board a respondent, and also include the concerned doctors/hospital to avoid objections. Seek stay and remand. For further legal assistance contact us on our helpline number.