Can a writ petition be filed for MHRB natural justice violation?
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?
Dear client, First Remedial steps against wrongful acts Section 83 of Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 have to File an appeal under section 83 of Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 before High Court because it is the specific remedy under law. In that appeal, clearly argue that denying cross-examination is a violation of natural justice. Make the Mental Health Review Board respondent and will also include the concerned doctors / hospital to avoid any obstacles. Seek stay and remand. If you have any query please feel free to contact us.
Dear Client, The Mental Healthcare Act 2017 establishes statutory appeal rights through Section 83, which you must submit as a Civil Miscellaneous Appeal to the High Court because an effective solution exists to your problem. Through the standing council, the mental healthcare board will try to defend its decisionThe proceedings need specific medical practitioners as parties because their findings require their testimony. The absence of cross-examination rights destroys the legal process, which can be demonstrated by evidence permitted under Sections 61 and 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023.
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.
Related Questions
24x7 Help
If we fall short of your expectation in any way, let us know
Payment Trust
All refunds come with no questions asked guarantee
