No proposal to use KNH premises for MLA residences, State tells HP High Court
Shimla, Sept 26,
The Himachal Pradesh government on Thursday informed the Himachal Pradesh High Court that there was no proposal to use the premises of Kamla Nehru State Hospital for Mother and Child for construction of residences for MLAs, putting to rest, at least for now, speculation that had become part of the controversy surrounding the proposed shifting of its gynaecology services to IGMC.
The statement was made before a division bench comprising Chief Justice Gurmeet Singh Sandhawalia and Justice Bipin C. Negi during the hearing of a public interest litigation, Falma Chauhan versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others (CWPIL No. 52 of 2026).
The court recorded the statement of the Secretary (Health) that the KNH premises would not be utilised for accommodating MLA residences and that the vacated facilities would, at this stage, be used only for hospital services.
The clarification came amid sustained protests by women’s organisations and other groups, who had alleged that shifting services from the historic hospital could eventually facilitate its diversion for other purposes. The claim regarding MLA residences has circulated widely during the agitation, although the latest court proceedings record the government’s categorical position that there is no such official proposal.
The controversy, however, remains centred on the feasibility and rationale of shifting gynaecology services to IGMC.
The latest affidavit of the Professor and Head of Obstetrics and Gynaecology placed before the court showed that 1,600.95 square metres was available for the gynaecology wing at KNH, whereas only 1,329.55 square metres had been allotted at IGMC. Of the latter area, around 60.90 square metres was still under construction.
The court noted that the area presently allotted at IGMC was “far short” of the area available at KNH. The government submitted that additional space could be identified after the shifting of the super-specialty department to Chamiyana.
The bench directed the state to file an affidavit on the availability of additional space and listed the matter for December 1, 2026.
The Secretary (Health) also informed the court that the Mother and Child Hospital would continue to function at KNH. The affidavit stated that the hospital has a built-up area of 18,564.25 square metres spread over 16.09 bighas, with nearly Rs 20 crore having been spent on the facility in 2019.
The latest proceedings have added a new dimension to the dispute that erupted after the government proposed shifting the gynaecology OPD and other services from KNH to IGMC, citing access to advanced technology and facilities, including robotic surgery. The proposal had faced opposition from women’s organisations, sections of the medical fraternity and local residents, who argued that separating obstetric and gynaecological services could disrupt integrated mother-and-child care.
The High Court had earlier, on May 13, stayed the proposed shifting while hearing the PIL filed by AIDWA state secretary Falma Chauhan and sought the government’s response.
The state subsequently constituted a high-level technical committee to examine the feasibility of shifting the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology to IGMC as well as the implications of retaining the facility at KNH.
The issue acquired further public attention following incidents involving deaths of patients at Shimla government hospitals. In July 2025, a woman died at KNH following a caesarean delivery, with her family alleging medical negligence; the hospital ordered an internal inquiry and the medical superintendent rejected the allegations.
More recently, AIDWA renewed its agitation against the proposed shifting of gynaecology OPD and ward services, particularly questioning the separation of services between KNH and IGMC.
With the government now formally assuring the High Court that KNH premises will continue to be used for hospital services and will not be converted into MLA accommodation, the immediate controversy over the proposed alternative use of the land appears to have been addressed. The larger question of whether shifting parts of the gynaecology wing to an already constrained IGMC is medically and infrastructurally feasible, however, remains before the High Court.