Madras High Court
Prof.Dr.K.Jagannath vs ) Medical Council Of India on 4 September, 2023
W.P.Nos.19087 to 19093 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 04.09.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE Mrs. JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU
AND
THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE.V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN
W.P.Nos.19087 to 19093 of 2014
and M.P.No.1 of 2014(in all W.P.'s)
W.P.No.19087 of 2014:
Prof.Dr.K.Jagannath ... Petitioner
Vs.
1) Medical Council of India,
Rep. By its Deputy Secretary,
Pocket – 14, Section -8.
Dwarka, New Delhi 110 077
2) Ethics Committee,
Medical Council of India,
Rep. By its Chairman,
Pocket – 14, Section -8,
Dwarka, New Delhi 110 077 ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records in connection with the
impugned show cause notice in No.MCI-211(2)(620)(CBI-4)/Ethics/118649
dated 08.07.2014 on the file of the first respondent and quash the same.
____________
Page No.1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.19087 to 19093 of 2014
In all writ petitions:
For Petitioners : Mr.N.Senthilkumar
For R-1 : Mrs.Shubharanjani Ananth,
Standing Counsel
******
COMMON ORDER
(The order of the Court was made by J.NISHA BANU, J. and
V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.)
Since the issue involved in all these writ petitions are one and the
same, they are disposed of by this common order. These writ petitions
challenge the show cause notices issued by the Medical Council of India,
making certain allegations against the doctors.
2. Mr.N.Senthilkumar, learned counsel for the petitioners would
submit that the concerned Authority to initiate action is only the State
Medical Council and not the Medical Council of India.
3. This very question was put in issue before the Division Bench of
the Bombay High Court in W.P.No.11429 of 2012 (AS)...etc. in a batch. By
____________
Page No.2 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.19087 to 19093 of 2014
a detailed judgment, the Bombay High Court had dismissed the writ
petitions, holding as follows:-
“37. We are in complete agreement, therefore,
with Mr.Gole that the Council has original and
appellate power as well in terms of the IMC
Regulations. Once these Regulations and all the
chapters thereof are read together and harmoniously, it
is evident that nothing which is a misconduct or an
infamous conduct, can go without a disciplinary
enquiry and unpunished. If the larger public interest is
to be served and bearing in mind the role of medical
practitioners and physicians, then such comprehensive
regulations and measures have to be enacted. Having
enacted them, a meaning will have to be placed on its
clauses enabling the Councils to deal with the
misconduct and/or infamous acts. That would be
advancing the remedy. A narrow or restricted
interpretation is likely to frustrate and defeat the IMC
Act itself. Therefore, we are not in agreement with the
learned counsel for the Petitioners insofar as the
jurisdiction, power and authority of Council are
concerned.”
____________
Page No.3 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.19087 to 19093 of 2014
4. The said matter was put in appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme
Court of India in SLP(Civil) No.32464 of 2015. The Hon'ble Supreme
Court, by an order dated 30.11.2015 had declined to entertain the SLP and
the SLP was dismissed.
5. We have independently gone through the provisions and we are of
the firm view that the erstwhile Medical Council of India had the power,
both original as well as appellate, in matters of discipline. We therefore
come to a conclusion that the Medical Council of India had the jurisdiction
to issue the show cause notice. At the stage of challenge to a show cause
notice, we cannot go into the merits of the allegations made by the
petitioners. The petitioners can raise the issue of jurisdiction alone. That
argument failing, the writ petitions have to fail.
6. Having being satisfied with the jurisdiction, we are of the view that
the petitioners may submit their explanation, if not already submitted. The
State Ethics Committee, which is a body under the State Medical Council,
____________
Page No.4 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.19087 to 19093 of 2014
pursuant to the show cause notice that has been issued, shall initiate and
complete the disciplinary proceedings, in terms of Section 27 of the
National Medical Commission Act, 2019.
7. In case response has not been submitted, then, the response shall be
submitted within a period of four(04) weeks from today, i.e. 04.09.2023. It
is open to the writ petitioners to raise all contentions excepting those
relating to jurisdiction as it has been concluded by an order of this Court.
The entire exercise shall be completed by the second respondent within a
period of twelve(12) weeks thereafter. With the above directions, these Writ
petitions stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous
petitions are closed.
(J.N.B.,J.) (V.L.N.,J.)
04.09.2023
Index:Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citration: Yes / No
sts
____________
Page No.5 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.19087 to 19093 of 2014
J.NISHA BANU,J.
and
V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN,J.
sts
To:
1) The Deputy Secretary,
Medical Council of India,
Pocket – 14, Section -8.
Dwarka, New Delhi 110 077
2) The Chairman,
Ethics Committee,
Medical Council of India,
Pocket – 14, Section -8,
Dwarka, New Delhi 110 077
Common Order made in
W.P.Nos.19087 to 19093 of 2014
Dated:
04.09.2023
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
