ANALDEB BASU Vs. WEST BENGAL MEDICAL COUNCIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This intra-Court appeal is directed against the order dtd. 20/3/2023 passed in WPA 5439 of 2023 by which the learned Single Bench declined to grant any interim order as prayed for by the appellant. The appellant challenged an order dtd. 17/2/2023 passed by the West Bengal Medical Council by which the name of the appellant was removed from the Register of Registered Medical Practitioners maintained by the West Bengal Medical Council for a period of six months under Sec. 25(a)(ii) of the Bengal Medical Act, 1914. The said order further stated that in terms of Sec. 26 of the said Act an appeal lies against the said order to the Government.

(2.) The short issue which falls for consideration in this appeal is whether the appellant is entitled for an interim protection till the writ petition is heard or in the event the appellant should be directed to file an appeal to the Government or till the appeal is disposed of. On perusal of the order dtd. 17/2/2023, we find that no reasons have been assigned as to why the Medical Council found the appellant guilty of infamous conduct in professional respect leading to removal of his name from the Register of Registered Medical Practitioner for a period of six months. Therefore, we issued an interim direction directing the Medical Council to place the entire file concerning the issue and, accordingly, the learned Advocate for the Medical Council has placed the entire file from which it is seen that based on a complaint given by the family of the deceased patient, the Medical Council took up the matter for enquiry and had referred the matter to the P.E. Committee and the Committee consisting of four members and the Registrar of the Medical Council being the Convenor. In the original file the minutes of the meeting of the committee finds place and the Committee has found the appellant guilty of professional misconduct and recommended charge sheet to be laid against him.

(3.) It is the submission of the learned advocate appearing for the Medical Council that when the Bengal Medical Act, 1914 does not stipulate that the Medical Council has to assign reasons while removing the name of the appellant from the Register of the Registered Medical Practitioner, the Medical Council cannot be compelled to give reasons, more particularly, when it was a case of medical negligence and the Chairman and the members of the P.E. Committee considered the entire matter and had found the appellant guilty of misconduct in professional respect. As pointed out earlier, the order dtd. 17/2/2023 communicated to the appellant does not state as to why the appellant has been found guilty of infamous conduct in professional respect. The charge sheet, which was directed to be filed, is based upon the finding recommended by the P.E. Committee. Therefore, we are of the view that the findings need to be communicated to the appellant so that the appellant will be made aware of the basis of which he was found guilty and also what laid to the recommendation of the Committee for issuing charge sheet. Until and unless the minutes of the meeting of the Committee are communicated to the appellant, the appellant will be at a loss to understand as to what was the basis for initiating disciplinary action against him. Therefore, we are of the view that the Medical Council should communicate the minutes of the meeting of the P.E. Committee to enable the appellant to question the correctness of the said report which ultimately lead to the order of punishment dtd. 17/2/2023. So far as the issue as to whether the appellant could have challenged the order dtd. 17/2/2023 in a writ petition, we are of the view that the appellate remedy provided under the Bengal Medical Act, 1914 is an efficacious remedy and since the disputed questions of fact are involved, it is advisable for the appellant to avail such appellate remedy as the case cannot be decided based on affidavits in a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.