Bhaskar Guha v. Medical Council Of India

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 1129 of 2015 Bhaskar Guha S/o Late A.B. Guha Aged About 37 years Near Bony Agency Devri Khurd PS Torwa Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 495004 ---- Petitioner

Versus

1.

Medical Council Of India Pocket 14 Sector 8 Dwarka, PS Dwarka New Delhi 2.

Chhattisgarh Medical Council Kankalipara, Near Nagar Nigam Ayurvedic Hospital PS Civil Lines, Raipur Chhattisgarh 3.

Dr. Varsha Nawal Senior DMO (OPD) Central Hospital, South East Central Railway, Bilaspur, PS Torwa Chhattisgarh 4.

Dr. Sumit Prakash Central Hospital, South East Central Railway Bilaspur, PS Torwa Chhattisgarh 5.

Dr. B. Lalchandani Central Hospital, South East Central Railway Bilaspur, PS Torwa Chhattisgarh 6.

Dr. P. Jaiswal , SMO Orthopaedician, Central Hospital, South East Central Railway Bilaspur, PS Torwa Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For petitioner :

Shri A.V. Shridhar, Advocate.

Order On Board 03/07/2015 Heard.

2.

The grievance ventilated through this petition is that even though the Medical Council of India has entrusted the Registrar, C.G. Medical Council to examine the complaint of the petitioner against medical professionals, in terms of provisions contained in clause 8.4 of Indian Medical Council (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations 2002 (for short ), no steps are being taken. 3.

Without commenting upon the merits of the complaint of the petitioner, considering that the Medical Council of India has already instructed the State Council to examine the complaint which is their statutory obligation under the aforesaid

regulations of 2002, I am not inclined to keep this matter pending. 4.

Accordingly, this petition, at this stage, is disposed off with a direction to respondent No.2 to perform their obligation of examination of the complaint in terms of the provisions contained in regulations of 2002 and take decision on those complaints in accordance with law. This shall be done as early as possible. 5.

It is made clear that this Court has not commented upon the merits of the complaint. It will be open for the Council to take appropriate decision in the matter. It goes without saying that opportunity of hearing shall be afforded to the petitioner as also to the professionals against whom, complaints have been made Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Deepti