More questions than answers in selection of PGI’s Director : The Tribune India

Join Whatsapp Channel

TRIBUNE SPECIAL

More questions than answers in selection of PGI’s Director

NEW DELHI: The process to select the Director of PGI in Chandigarh has come in for serious questioning with concerns being raised over the propriety of shortlisting two of the three finalists.

More questions than answers in selection of PGI’s Director


Aditi Tandon

Tribune News Service

New Delhi, December 4

The process to select the Director of PGI in Chandigarh, India’s premier medical teaching and research institute, has come in for some serious questioning with concerns being raised over the propriety of shortlisting two of the three finalists.

Leading the questioning is none other than a senior member of the PGI institute body and Lok Sabha MP of the ruling NDA alliance Prem Singh Chandumajra, who has sought a review of the selection process citing lapses.

Among the three contenders for the top slot (in the order of merit) are Dr Anil Bhansali, Head of Endocrinology Department, PGI; Dr Meenu Singh, Professor, Paediatrics and Professor in charge of the Telemedicine Centre, PGI, and Dr Jagat Ram, Head of Department, Ophthalmology, PGI.

A major concern relates to the seniority of the shortlisted candidates. While Dr Jagat Ram is the seniormost among PGI’s around 110 professors, Dr Bhansali is 27th and Dr Meenu Singh a distant 52nd. The panel of finalists which the PGI Director’s search and selection committee approved and the institute body later ratified placed Dr Ram last and Dr Bhansali and Dr Singh in the first and second positions, respectively.

Earlier, during the selection process, the panel had eliminated out of contention two senior PGI professors Digamber Behera and Arvind Rajvanshi, who, according to the institute’s seniority enlisting, are higher than even the three finalists.

The Health Ministry, when contacted, said the PGI Director’s selection was not based on seniority and merit and suitability were the only criteria. PGI doctors, however, mention how prior to 2011 when Dr YK Chawla was appointed Director, seniority always carried a premium in selections and all institute heads were from among the seniormost faculty.

Interviews for PGI Director were introduced in 2011, to the surprise of many considering that no interviews have been held to date for the selection of Directors of AIIMS.

Asked why the selection criteria for heads of AIIMS and PGI, both set up under Acts of Parliament, should differ, a ministry official said as per the Department of Personnel and Training guidelines, a search and selection committee has to be set up to select the directors of both these autonomous institutions and this panel is free to evolve its own selection criteria. “We respect the committee’s wisdom,” said the official.

He gave the same reason (of the committee’s freedom) to answer why the PGI Director’s selection committee this year decided to drop the practice of marking applicants as against 2011 when applicants were granted weightage during interviews.

This year’s selections were purely based on a personal interview with no marking. Many applicants saw this omission as a major compromise on objectivity.

The PGI Director’s search panel this year has also been challenged for its lack of representation to an SC/ST member. In its reply to the National SC Commission which the PGI SC/ST Association has petitioned, Ministry Director Rabindra Prasad argues that the search and selection committee was set up by the PGI institute body as per procedures under the PGI Act.

Ministry officials further argue that no SC/ST member’s representation is required in a search committee posts with less than 10 vacancies. The Tribune, however, has access to a June 4, 2010 DoPT circular which says that such representation is desirable if not mandatory.

There are other concerns regarding the PGI Director’s search and selection committee this year. Chaired by Health Secretary CK Mishra, the committee has former DG, ICMR, VM Katoch and a privately practising heart specialist, Shridhar Dwivedi, among members.

Minutes of the panel’s meeting held in Delhi on October 20 to interview 26 candidates for the post reveal that Dr Katoch had nominated Dr VK Sharma, Head, Dermatology, AIIMS, for the job. Though the minutes confirm that Dr Katoch recused himself from the interview of this candidate, eyebrows are being raised about why it was absolutely necessary to have Dr Katoch on the panel.

Asked if it would not have been fit for Dr Katoch to decline the search panel membership, a ministry official said, “There is no such requirement. When the nomination happened, Dr Katoch didn’t know he would be invited to the committee. There’s no cause for worry since the said applicant has not been shortlisted.”

That said, ethical concerns remain. DoPT’s July 30, 2007 circular encourages infusion of new experts on selection panels and discourages repetitions. The circular says, “The tendency to rely on the same experts for recruitments over long periods should be avoided.” Dr VM Katoch was also a member of the search committee which selected YK Chawla as the PGI Director in 2011.

Questions are also being asked in the medical fraternity about whether Dr Shridhar Dwivedi is senior enough to select the PGI Director, a post equivalent to Secretary, Government of India. The DoPT circular says members of committees should ideally be either equal to or above the rank for which the selection is being made. Dwivedi was Dean at the University College of Medical Sciences, a Delhi government institute, and would naturally have a lower grade pay than PGI Director. The ministry, however, cites his eminence for his presence on the panel. 

Now, about the selection process. Applicants for the PGI Director’s post received two communications. The first asked them to be present at the Health Ministry headquarters in Delhi from 2.30 pm onwards on October 20. The second, two days later, said applicants should also prepare five slides (two on personal achievements and three on their vision for PGI).

“This shows the selection committee was experimenting with the selection criteria. They interviewed 26 applicants between 3 pm and 9 pm that day. Many of us were asked to rush our presentations. One wonders how, in the absence of objective criteria, the committee could have fairly evaluated 26 candidates merely on their presentations in a span of six hours!” wonders one of the candidates.

Eventually, the search committee approved a panel of three candidates which the PGI institute body ratified on November 3. The panel stands referred to the Appointments Committee of Cabinet headed by the Prime Minister for final selection.

Serious lapses have meanwhile come back to haunt the selection process, as also flagged by Chandumajra in his letter to the PMO and Health Minister JP Nadda.

Picture this: PGI Director’s recruitment rules require an extensive administrative experience in running an institution as head or running a department as head. Dr Meenu Singh, a finalist, is not HoD. She is only Professor in charge of Telemedicine Centre, PGI, which is not a department. Ministry officials, however, insist, “Dr Singh is eligible.” They don’t explain how.

The first finalist Dr Anil Bhansali was issued an advisory note in 2006 following a vigilance inquiry which established that he had purchased an instrument (CT Status Instrument) from Bayer Diagnostic India and allowed its use in his department lab while being HoD. The case was closed but it’s unclear if the vigilance advisory note to Dr Bhansali was mentioned in his ACC proforma mandated to be filled for an applicant. The proforma requires past records of vigilance penalties to be mentioned even if cases have been closed.

Secondly, Dr Bhansali was among the authors of a 2013 research paper which attracted allegations of unethical practice. Allegations were brought by a PGI doctor and the PGI ethics committee held one of the authors Pinaki Dutta, Dr Bhansali’s junior in the Endocrinology Department, guilty. Dr Bhansali happened to be corresponding author of this paper published in the journal Endocrine.

Again, in May last year, another PGI doctor Nandita Kakker complained to the then Dean Savita Malhotra against unethical research practices. She alleged that authors of a paper published in the European Journal of Endocrinology concocted the results. Among these authors were Dr Bhansali and Dr Dutta. Nothing has been established in this complaint so far. Kakker’s complaint read, “I’ve been part of unethical research practice without my knowledge. This paper was published without my knowledge but with my name in it... Entire result is concocted.” 

When contacted, Dr Bhansali admitted to the vigilance inquiry saying it was only about a procedural and not a financial lapse. “The complaint was against HoD, Endocrinology, and not against me. I happened to be HoD. It was about the department not securing the Director’s permission to purchase a certain instrument. It was procedural, nor financial. After that inquiry, I became HoD.”

The Ministry said Dr Bhansali had received vigilance clearance and was therefore called for the interview. On allegations of research fraud, Dr Bhansali told TNS, “There are none against me.”

It remains to be seen who is chosen as the PGI head. 

Dr Jagat Ram has the distinction of receiving 24 awards, 11 of them international. Dr Bhansali, for his part, led the upgradation of the PGI Endocrinology Lab to a state-of-the-art facility which makes Rs 4 crore annually. He led the establishment of the diabetic foot lab, besides stretching registration timings for patients to 4 pm.

Dr Meenu Singh was briefly heading The National Institute of Nursing Education at PGI. Though not head of Pediatrics, she leads two units: paediatric pulmonology and infectious diseases. She also heads the ICMR Advanced Centre for evidence based child health.

Major concerns & Health Ministry responses

  • Seniority compromised in selections, including in the final panel of three, where Dr Jagat Ram, seniormost professor, is placed behind Dr Anil Bhansali (27th in PGI professor seniority) and Dr Meenu Singh (52nd). Ministry says selection not based on seniority as eight of the shortlisted applicants were outsiders and seniority list wasn’t drawn. Questions remain on why seniority not weighted in the final panel, which only has PGI professors and not outsiders.
  • Was it proper for search committee member Dr VM Katoch to continue on the panel having nominated one candidate? Ministry says no problem as that candidate wasn't shortlisted.
  • In 2011, search committee held interviews with candidates for the first time, also gave marks. This time, the panel did interactions, took slide presentations but dropped marking. DoPT’s July 30, 2007 circular requires selection criteria and norms to be finalised by the institutes concerned (PGI here) in concurrence with the Ministry. The Ministry says search committee free to evolve any selection criteria, Government trusts its wisdom.
  • Concerns over two candidates making it to the final shortlist when one, Dr Meenu Singh, is not HoD (an eligibility criteria) and Dr Anil Bhansali has past record of vigilance advisory in a 2005 case which was later closed. Ministry says Dr Meenu Singh is eligible and Dr Bhansali had due vigilance clearance.

Top News

Jailed gangster-politician Mukhtar Ansari dies of cardiac arrest

Jailed gangster-politician Mukhtar Ansari dies of cardiac arrest

Ansari was hospitalised after he complained of abdominal pai...

Delhi High Court dismisses PIL to remove Arvind Kejriwal from CM post after arrest

Delhi High Court dismisses PIL to remove Arvind Kejriwal from CM post after arrest

The bench refuses to comment on merits of the issue, saying ...

Arvind Kejriwal to be produced before Delhi court today as 6-day ED custody ends

Excise policy case: Delhi court extends ED custody of Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal till April 1

In his submissions, Kejriwal said, ‘I am named by 4 witnesse...

‘Unwarranted, unacceptable’: India on US remarks on Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal’s arrest

‘Unwarranted, unacceptable’: India on US remarks on Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal’s arrest

MEA spokesperson says India is proud of its independent and ...

Gujarat court sentences former IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt to 20 years in jail in 1996 drug case

Gujarat court sentences former IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt to 20 years in jail in 1996 drug case

Bhatt, who was sacked from the force in 2015, is already beh...


Cities

View All