Doctor need not rise for MLA: HC directs immediate NOC, slaps Rs 50,000 costs on Haryana

Coming down heavily on Haryana for proceeding against a doctor merely because he “did not rise when the MLA arrived” in the emergency ward during the Covid-19 period, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has expressed its “anguish” before imposing Rs 50,000 costs on the State. A Division Bench also directed the State to forthwith issue a no objection certificate to the doctor for admission to a post-graduate course.

“With anguish, we note that frequent reports surface in newspapers of dedicated medical professionals being ill-treated by relatives of patients or public representatives without valid cause. Time has come when such undesirable incidents are checked and due recognition is extended to sincere medical professionals,” the Bench of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Rohit Kapoor held.

The Bench observed that the petitioner, a casualty medical officer working with Haryana, secured sufficient marks to obtain admission to PG course. He, as such, sought NOC from the employer-State to apply as an in-service candidate. But the certificate was withheld on the ground that disciplinary proceedings were pending against the petitioner. Aggrieved, he approached the Court.

“We are anguished and amazed at the State action in issuing a show cause notice to a government doctor on emergency duty during COVID-19 period only because he did not rise when the MLA arrived. To expect a doctor to rise when an MLA enters the emergency ward of the hospital and to propose disciplinary action against him if he does not rise is highly disturbing. The petitioner’s explanation that he did not recognise the MLA or that he did not do anything to inflict insult has been completely ignored,” the Bench added

The court further added it was, in its view, insensitive on the State’s part to proceed against the petitioner on such a charge. It would be equally arbitrary to deny him the right to pursue higher medical education by withholding the NOC only because show cause notice was pending against him.

“Pursuing medical education is a tough challenge. Students must perform exceptionally well even to secure admission in MBBS course. It is well-known that medical courses require deep dedication and commitment over prolonged periods. After completing MBBS and joining government service, a doctor is expected to provide medical facilities to the masses. Public representatives and others responsible must extend respect and basic courtesies to such dedicated professionals,” the Bench added.

Allowing the writ petition, the Bench asserted: “It would be wholly unjust and manifestly arbitrary to allow adverse action against a doctor merely because he did not rise upon the arrival of an MLA. Keeping such proceedings pending for years and denying the petitioner an NOC on such basis, therefore, cannot be sustained. The respondent-State is, therefore, directed to issue the NOC to the petitioner forthwith,” the Bench concluded.