HC stays notice to remove burial spot in hospice

The Madras High Court has stayed the operation of an order by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate-cum-Revenue Divisional Officer of Kancheepuram directing the St Joseph’s Hospice in Paleswaram in Kancheepuram district to remove the alleged burial place from the hospice.

The St Joseph’s Hospice has been under the scanner for alleged irregularities.  

Justice MS Ramesh on Thursday granted the injunction until March 22 while passing interim orders on a writ petition moved by V Thomas, managing director of the hospice. 

The petitioner had submitted that the concept of hospice is not that of a hospital, but taking care and focusing on the critically ill, terminable patients by giving them the environment of treating the sick, wounded or dying. 

The main purpose of the institution is to take care and protect the interest of dying destitutes, who are abandoned or orphaned by their family. In case of death, it also performed the last rites. The deaths are informed to the local police, village administrative officer and the panchayat. 

He further noted that a concrete vault burial place with huge pits was constructed with concrete pillars. There are beds of rods between the pillars and they are structured in such a way to provide an airtight space and create separate sections. 

Once a corpse is placed on the bed, it is closed airtight. This procedure does not need wood, fuel, electricity or vast space. It saves lot of space and energy. There is no chance of air or water pollution. 

While so, local politician G Karunakaran, due to mala fide or enmity, who also had developed a nexus with the local contractor who constructed the hospice buildings, demanded illegal money from the petitioner. 

On refusal, he induced the authorities and made several anonymous complaints against the petitioner, assassinating his character and that of the other members of the institution. 

Pursuant to this, the Kancheepuram Revenue Divisional Officer, without any authority of law, issued the show cause notice under Sec. 133 (a) of the CrPC on February 22 last directing him to remove the ‘nuisance’, the petitioner said and sought to quash the same.