The Doctors Post

Category: Legal News

Legal News

  • Chennai Doctor Arrested After Nurse Alleges Misbehaviour at Private Hospital

    Chennai Doctor Arrested After Nurse Alleges Misbehaviour at Private Hospital

    A doctor was arrested in Kodungaiyur after a 20-year-old nurse allegedly accused him of misbehaving with her while she was attending to a patient at a private hospital.

    Nurse Alleges Misbehaviour During Duty

    A doctor was arrested in Kodungaiyur, Chennai, after a 20-year-old nurse working at a private hospital allegedly accused him of misbehaving with her while she was attending to a patient.

    The incident reportedly took place on Friday evening, August 7, at a private hospital located on Manali Salai in Kodungaiyur.

    According to police, the nurse was performing her duties and attending to a patient when the duty doctor allegedly misbehaved with her.

    Nurse Files Complaint With Police

    Following the alleged incident, the nurse approached the MKB Nagar All Women Police Station and lodged a complaint.

    Based on her complaint, police registered a case and launched an investigation into the allegations.

    The doctor and the nurse were employed at the same private hospital, according to reports.

    Doctor Arrested, Sent to Judicial Custody

    According to The Hindu, police arrested the doctor on Saturday, August 8, after conducting an investigation based on the nurse’s complaint.

    The accused was subsequently produced before a judicial magistrate, who sent him to prison.

    Police said the doctor was booked under three sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and one section of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act.

    Investigation Underway

    The alleged incident occurred while the nurse was carrying out her professional duties at the hospital.

    Police are continuing to investigate the circumstances surrounding the alleged harassment and are examining the evidence collected during the probe.

    Further proceedings will depend on the investigation and other evidence gathered by the police. Additional details regarding the case and the next legal steps are awaited.

    The allegations against the doctor remain subject to the outcome of the investigation and judicial proceedings.

  • Kolkata Consumer Court Issues Notice to Chennai ENT Hospital, Doctors in Rs 7.02 Crore Medical Negligence Case

    Kolkata Consumer Court Issues Notice to Chennai ENT Hospital, Doctors in Rs 7.02 Crore Medical Negligence Case

    The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kolkata, has admitted a complaint seeking Rs 7.02 crore in compensation over the death of a 16-year-old boy during nasal surgery at a Chennai-based ENT hospital.

    Consumer Court Admits Rs 7.02 Crore Compensation Complaint

    The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (DCDRC), Kolkata (Unit 1) has issued notices to a Chennai-based senior ENT specialist, an anaesthetist and the hospital in connection with a Rs 7.02 crore medical negligence complaint.

    The complaint was filed by the mother of a 16-year-old boy who allegedly died on the operation theatre table while undergoing nasal surgery at the Chennai-based ENT hospital on June 13, 2024.

    The complainant has alleged medical negligence and deceptive trade practices, claiming compensation of Rs 7.02 crore from the doctors and hospital.

    Boy Allegedly Died During Nasal Surgery

    According to the complaint, the patient was a high school student with no significant pre-existing or co-morbid medical condition apart from a deviated nasal septum (DNS) and sinusitis.

    The family allegedly travelled from Kolkata to Chennai after being attracted by an online advertisement for treatment at a specialised ENT hospital.

    Following evaluation, the treating senior ENT surgeon allegedly assured the family that the condition could be treated through a short nasal surgery and that the patient would be discharged on the same day after recovering from anaesthesia.

    The patient was subsequently scheduled for septo-FESS (functional endoscopic sinus surgery) under general anaesthesia on June 13, 2024.

    Sudden Collapse After Anaesthesia

    According to the complaint and anaesthetic records, the patient was taken to the operation theatre at around 7:15 am and maintained normal blood pressure until approximately 8:45 am.

    The complaint alleges that the patient’s blood pressure subsequently dropped rapidly and that he suffered cardiac arrest soon after the administration of anaesthesia.

    Although medicines and cardiopulmonary resuscitation were reportedly attempted for around an hour, the patient was declared dead at approximately 11:15 am.

    The cause of death was recorded as “Malignant Hyperthermia due to succinyl choline”, according to the complaint.

    Allegations Over Management of Malignant Hyperthermia

    The complainant alleged that the patient developed malignant hyperthermia (MH), a rare and potentially life-threatening reaction associated with certain anaesthetic agents and muscle relaxants.

    The complaint further alleged that appropriate emergency management measures for an acute MH crisis were not followed and that dantrolene sodium, a specific treatment used in the management of malignant hyperthermia, was not administered.

    The complainant also alleged that the doctors and hospital failed to provide complete medical records related to the treatment.

    These allegations are part of the consumer complaint and have not been established as findings of medical negligence by the Consumer Commission at this stage.

    Complaint Cites Medical Literature

    In support of the complaint, the patient’s mother submitted medical literature concerning the management of malignant hyperthermia.

    The complainant argued that advances in the understanding and treatment of MH have substantially reduced mortality associated with the condition.

    She further alleged that the medical records showed that recommended steps for managing an acute MH crisis were not followed and that the failure to administer dantrolene contributed to the patient’s death.

    Compensation Sought for Alleged Medical Failure

    The complaint stated that while the loss of a human life cannot be compensated in monetary terms, the family should be entitled to compensation for the alleged medical failure and resulting financial and non-financial losses.

    The complainant relied on the Supreme Court judgment in Balaram Prasad vs Kunal Saha & Ors., contending that just compensation in medical negligence cases should take into account pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages, along with factors such as interest, inflation and punitive damages.

    Consumer Court Finds Prima Facie Case

    After considering the complaint and documents submitted by the complainant, the Consumer Commission observed that the matter fell within its territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction.

    The Commission further observed that a prima facie case had been made out against the opposite parties and provisionally admitted the complaint.

    The Consumer Court has issued notices to the concerned doctors and hospital and fixed August 14, 2026, for their appearance and response.

    The proceedings will determine the allegations raised in the complaint. At this stage, the allegations of medical negligence remain subject to adjudication by the Consumer Commission.

  • Doctor Couple Summoned in Rs 50 Lakh Defamation Suit Over COVID-19 Complaints

    A local court has summoned a doctor couple in a Rs 50 lakh defamation case filed by a retired biologist who served as a district COVID officer. The dispute relates to complaints made during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 and subsequent criminal proceedings involving both sides.

    Background of the Dispute

    The defamation suit was filed by the retired officer through his advocate before the Additional Civil Judge. The court has directed the doctor couple to submit their response by September 1, 2026.

    According to the petition, the dispute originated in 2020 when the complainant allegedly approached senior health officials regarding the doctor couple. It was alleged that the doctors continued operating an OPD despite testing positive for COVID-19 and allegedly failed to comply with government quarantine guidelines.

    The complaint subsequently led to a departmental inquiry and registration of an FIR at Urban Estate police station under Sections 188, 269 and 270 of the IPC, along with Section 54 of the Disaster Management Act.

    Counter-Complaint and Subsequent Proceedings

    The petition further stated that the doctor couple later lodged a complaint against the retired officer. This resulted in another FIR being registered at City police station under Section 509 of the IPC.

    The retired officer has claimed that the allegations made against him were subsequently found to be unsubstantiated. According to his petition, the FIR was later cancelled, while a related protest petition was also withdrawn.

    Despite this, the complainant alleged that the accusations against him were circulated through newspapers, YouTube and social media platforms. He claimed that the circulation of the allegations caused him mental distress and adversely affected his social and professional reputation.

    Rs 50 Lakh Compensation Sought

    The retired officer has sought Rs 50 lakh in damages along with 18% annual interest. He has also sought a public apology on social media and an unconditional apology to be published on the front page of a national newspaper.

    The complainant further stated that a legal notice was sent to the defendants but received no response.

    Court Issues Summons

    The court has now issued summonses to the doctor couple and directed them to file their response by September 1, 2026.

    The matter will proceed further after the submissions of both sides are placed before the court.

    Important Highlights

    • A local court has summoned a doctor couple in a Rs 50 lakh defamation suit.
    • The dispute relates to complaints made during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020.
    • An FIR was registered under IPC Sections 188, 269 and 270 and Section 54 of the Disaster Management Act.
    • The retired officer has alleged that accusations against him were circulated through newspapers, YouTube and social media.
    • He has sought Rs 50 lakh in damages with 18% annual interest and public apologies.
    • The doctor couple has been directed to submit their response by September 1, 2026.
  • Jharkhand Doctor, Home Guard Jawan Booked Over Bribe-for-Fitness Certificate Allegations

    Jharkhand Doctor, Home Guard Jawan Booked Over Bribe-for-Fitness Certificate Allegations

    A doctor and a Home Guard jawan have been booked in Chatra for allegedly demanding money from newly selected recruits in exchange for medical fitness certificates during the ongoing recruitment examination.

    Candidates Allege Bribe Demands During Medical Tests

    A doctor and a Home Guard jawan have been booked in Jharkhand’s Chatra district for allegedly demanding money from newly selected Home Guard recruits in exchange for medical fitness certificates.

    The allegations surfaced after candidates undergoing the recruitment medical examination claimed that they were asked to pay money to obtain fitness certificates.

    FIR Registered on Deputy Commissioner’s Directions

    According to reports, an FIR was registered at Chatra Sadar police station on Wednesday following directions from the Deputy Commissioner, who is also the chairman of the Home Guard Recruitment Committee.

    The complaint was filed by the Kanhachatti Circle Officer-cum-In-Charge Block Development Officer of Chatra Sadar Block.

    The accused have been booked under provisions relating to extortion, cheating and criminal conspiracy, along with sections concerning the preparation of false documents by a public servant and provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

    Medical Examination Underway Since July 25

    The medical examination and document verification of newly selected Home Guard recruits began on July 25 at the District Commandant, Home Guard office in Chatra.

    The recruitment process is scheduled to continue until August 12.

    The case followed repeated complaints from candidates who alleged that they were being asked to pay money for medical fitness certificates.

    Candidates Report Demands of Up to Rs 6,000

    According to the allegations, the reported demands ranged from Rs 2,000 to Rs 6,000.

    Some candidates also alleged that amounts between Rs 1 lakh and Rs 1.5 lakh were sought to declare them medically fit. However, officials clarified that these higher-value allegations have not yet been verified and will be examined during the investigation.

    Preliminary Probe Indicates Prima Facie Involvement

    Gope said that questioning of candidates and the preliminary probe revealed the prima facie involvement of the doctor and the Home Guard jawan, leading to registration of the FIR, reports the Times of India.

    Authorities are now investigating the allegations and examining the role of the accused in the recruitment medical examination process.

    Further action will be taken based on the findings of the investigation.

  • Delhi HC Directs CPWD to Remove Fire Safety Deficiencies, Expedite RML Hospital Super Speciality Block

    Delhi HC Directs CPWD to Remove Fire Safety Deficiencies, Expedite RML Hospital Super Speciality Block

    The Delhi High Court has directed the Central Public Works Department (CPWD) to immediately address fire safety deficiencies delaying the commissioning of the under-construction super speciality block at Ram Manohar Lohia (RML) Hospital. The court said the facility must be completed without any further delay, considering its importance to public healthcare.

    A bench comprising Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia observed that completing the facility at the earliest was in the larger public interest. The court stressed that deficiencies identified by the Delhi Fire Services must be rectified promptly so that the project can be commissioned.

    The court was hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by civil rights organisation Social Jurist, seeking directions for the super speciality block to be made operational at the earliest.

    During the proceedings, the hospital informed the court that all statutory approvals required for the facility had been obtained except the fire safety certificate.

    According to the Delhi Fire Services, the hospital’s application for a fire safety certificate was rejected on March 9 after inspectors identified 20 deficiencies in the building. A second inspection conducted on July 4 found that none of the previously identified deficiencies had been rectified, following which the application was again rejected on July 22.

    A third inspection was conducted on August 1. The fire department informed the court that a fresh report detailing the remaining deficiencies would be shared with the hospital authorities and the CPWD within three days.

    Taking note of the delay, the Delhi High Court impleaded the CPWD’s Chief Architect as a party to the proceedings and issued notice.

    The long-awaited super speciality block at Atal Bihari Vajpayee Institute of Medical Sciences (ABVIMS) and RML Hospital is expected to strengthen specialised healthcare services once operational. The facility, estimated to cost nearly Rs 400 crore, is awaiting final fire safety clearance before it can open for patients.

    The matter has been listed for further hearing on September 7. The PIL was filed through advocates Ashok Agarwal and Kumar Utkarsh, seeking directions for the nearly Rs 400-crore facility to be made fully operational at the earliest.

  • Man Posing as Doctor in Madhya Pradesh Arrested After 27 Years on Run in 1998 Murder Case

    Man Posing as Doctor in Madhya Pradesh Arrested After 27 Years on Run in 1998 Murder Case

    A 53-year-old man who allegedly lived under a false identity as a neighbourhood doctor in Madhya Pradesh for nearly three decades has been arrested by the Delhi Police Crime Branch. The accused, locally known as “Dr Jhatka”, was arrested on Tuesday from Ashok Nagar district, ending a 27-year-long manhunt in connection with a 1998 murder case in Haryana’s Sonipat.

    The case dates back to May 10, 1998, when the accused allegedly attended a wedding in Saiyan Khera village in Sonipat. According to police, an argument broke out between him and members of the bride’s family. The accused and five armed associates allegedly opened indiscriminate fire, killing the bride’s uncle and a police official. Another person was also injured in the firing.

    The accused was arrested after the incident but allegedly escaped from police custody in 1999. He subsequently travelled to Colaba in Maharashtra, where he reportedly worked as a physical education teacher for about a year before moving to Ashok Nagar in Madhya Pradesh.

    After relocating to Madhya Pradesh, he allegedly assumed the identity of a doctor despite having no recognised medical qualification or registration. He opened a private clinic and reportedly gained the trust of local residents while practising medicine under the false identity.

    In 2003, he married a woman who currently works as an Auxiliary Nurse Midwife (ANM) at a government hospital in Mungaoli. The couple has two children. Apart from running the clinic, the accused also reportedly worked as a property dealer and contractor.

    During interrogation, the accused reportedly told police that he had previously been a kabaddi player and claimed that his association with criminals developed through the sport.

    Delhi Police said the case was reopened as part of efforts to trace the long-pending fugitive. Investigators reportedly confirmed his identity, tracked his daily routine and located him in Madhya Pradesh before conducting a raid and arresting him.

    Deputy Commissioner of Police (Crime) Chander Kumar Singh said investigators confirmed the accused’s identity and location before conducting the operation that led to his arrest.

    The arrest has also highlighted allegations of prolonged unauthorised medical practice, as the accused reportedly operated a private clinic for years without recognised medical qualifications or registration.

  • Delhi High Court Refuses to Quash Summons Against Doctor in Minor Rape Victim Pregnancy Termination Case

    Delhi High Court Refuses to Quash Summons Against Doctor in Minor Rape Victim Pregnancy Termination Case

    The Delhi High Court has refused to quash the summons issued to a doctor accused of terminating the pregnancy of a minor rape survivor without her consent. The Court also upheld the trial court’s order directing further investigation into the allegations, observing that the prosecution records disclose a prima facie case warranting trial.

    High Court Upholds Trial Court’s Orders

    Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav dismissed the doctor’s petition challenging the trial court’s orders directing further investigation and issuing summons.

    The Court held that the order dated September 29, 2020, directing further investigation did not warrant interference and that the order dated July 31, 2021, taking cognisance of the supplementary charge sheet and issuing summons was legally valid.

    The Court observed that the prosecution materials disclosed offences against the petitioner that require adjudication during trial.

    Allegations Relate to Termination of Minor’s Pregnancy

    According to the prosecution, an FIR was registered on October 4, 2019, at Police Station Saket under Sections 376, 313, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), along with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

    The complaint alleged that the minor prosecutrix was sexually assaulted after being administered an intoxicant, resulting in pregnancy.

    The prosecution further alleged that on July 26, 2019, the prosecutrix was taken by a co-accused posing as her aunt to a private medical centre in Ambedkar Nagar. After examination, she was referred to a private nursing home in Greater Kailash-II, where the doctor allegedly terminated the pregnancy.

    Protest Petition Led to Further Investigation

    Initially, the doctor was cited only as a prosecution witness in the main charge sheet filed on December 13, 2019.

    However, on February 22, 2020, the prosecutrix filed a protest petition alleging for the first time that the doctors at the Greater Kailash-II hospital had terminated her pregnancy in conspiracy with the principal accused, forged her signatures, and misplaced documents containing her actual date of birth.

    Based on these allegations, the trial court directed the Investigating Officer to conduct further investigation into whether the abortion had been carried out in violation of the law while the doctors were aware that the patient was a minor and whether they failed to report the matter to the police as required under Section 19 of the POCSO Act.

    Supplementary Charge Sheet Filed Against Doctor

    During further investigation, the prosecutrix stated that she had recorded her correct date of birth on the hospital admission slip and alleged that hospital staff altered her age to 20 years.

    Following the investigation, the Delhi Police filed a supplementary charge sheet on February 19, 2021, naming the doctor as the sole accused under Sections 313 and 201 IPC and Section 7 of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act.

    The trial court subsequently took cognisance, additionally invoked Section 21 of the POCSO Act, and issued summons to the doctor.

    High Court Finds Prima Facie Case

    Before the High Court, the doctor argued that the patient had been presented as an adult and that there was no reason to seek guardian consent. It was also contended that the doctor acted in good faith under the provisions of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act and was entitled to statutory protection.

    The High Court, however, held that these are matters to be examined during trial.

    The Court further observed that the doctor allegedly became aware of the offence on July 26, 2019, but failed to report it promptly, resulting in a delay of nearly 70 days in the registration of the FIR, which could have affected the investigation.

    Finding no legal infirmity in the impugned orders, the High Court dismissed the petition.

    Important Highlights

    • The Delhi High Court refused to quash summons issued to a doctor accused in a minor rape victim’s pregnancy termination case.
    • The Court upheld the trial court’s order directing further investigation into the allegations.
    • The prosecution alleges the pregnancy was terminated without the minor’s consent and that her age was incorrectly recorded.
    • A supplementary charge sheet named the doctor under Sections 313 and 201 IPC, Section 7 of the MTP Act, and the trial court also invoked Section 21 of the POCSO Act.
    • The High Court held that the prosecution records disclose a prima facie case and that the issues raised by the doctor must be decided during trial.
  • Delhi Health Department Rejects Overpricing Allegations in CPA Medical Procurement Report

    Delhi Health Department Rejects Overpricing Allegations in CPA Medical Procurement Report

    The Delhi Health Department has rejected allegations of overpricing in the procurement of medicines, medical equipment, and hospital supplies by the Central Procurement Agency (CPA), stating that official records indicate several purchases were made at rates comparable to, or lower than, those paid by other government institutions across the country. The findings were submitted to the Delhi Government’s Directorate of Vigilance as part of the ongoing inquiry into alleged procurement irregularities.

    Report Finds Procurement Prices Comparable to Government Rates

    According to the report, procurement data obtained from the Centre’s Government e-Marketplace (GeM) portal showed that several key items, including World Health Organization (WHO)-formula oral rehydration salts (ORS), handheld ultra-portable digital X-ray machines, and hospital-grade bedsheets, were purchased at prevailing institutional rates.

    However, the report clarified that price comparisons alone cannot determine the legality or efficiency of the procurement process. It stated that investigations into tender specifications, vendor selection, quality standards, inventory planning, and procedural compliance are continuing independently.

    Multiple Agencies Investigating Procurement Process

    The report comes amid parallel investigations by the Anti-Corruption Branch (ACB), the Directorate of Vigilance, and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) into alleged irregularities in procurements carried out by the CPA, which functions under the Directorate General of Health Services (DGHS).

    The investigations relate to allegations concerning procurement pricing, tender conditions, vendor selection, and inventory management. Earlier, the ACB arrested the former Director of DGHS, the former head of the CPA, and the former Deputy Controller of Accounts in connection with the case.

    Health Department Cites GeM Procurement Records

    According to the report, procurement prices should be assessed by comparing them with similar institutional purchases rather than retail market prices.

    Regarding allegations that WHO-formula ORS sachets were procured at inflated rates, the report noted that several government institutions, including Northern Coalfields Ltd, Employees’ State Insurance Scheme (Odisha), SAIL Bhilai Steel Plant, IISCO Steel Plant, PGIMER Chandigarh, Western Railway Jaipur, Banaras Hindu University, and Lok Nayak Hospital, purchased similar ORS sachets at ₹8.74 per unit.

    The report stated that the CPA procured 1.5 million ORS sachets at an effective price of ₹8.69 per sachet before GST after a 60.5% discount on the printed MRP of ₹23.11. It added that claims of procurement at ₹2–₹2.50 per sachet were not supported by documentary evidence and did not account for differences in formulation, pack size, quality standards, or institutional procurement requirements.

    X-Ray Machine and Bedsheet Pricing Also Defended

    Addressing allegations that handheld ultra-portable digital X-ray machines worth around ₹10 lakh were purchased for approximately ₹33 lakh, the report stated that GeM records showed the same ProRad Atlas model had been procured by other government agencies at prices ranging from ₹32.98 lakh to ₹33.60 lakh.

    According to the report, the CPA purchased the equipment at ₹32.98 lakh per unit, matching the lowest comparable government procurement price.

    The report also rejected allegations regarding hospital bedsheets, explaining that government hospitals require specialised linen meeting prescribed standards for fabric quality, GSM, weave, dimensions, and durability.

    After reviewing nearly 90 GeM contracts executed between early 2025 and mid-2026, the department found that institutional procurement prices generally ranged between ₹400 and ₹500 per bedsheet. It cited purchases by AIIMS Rishikesh, Dr Baba Saheb Ambedkar Hospital, Safdarjung Hospital, the Chief Medical Officer in Barabanki, and AIIMS Kalyani, where similar bedsheets were procured for ₹400 to ₹798 per unit. The report stated that the CPA’s procurement price of around ₹400 per bedsheet was among the most economical.

    Investigation Into Procurement Process Continues

    The inquiry stems from an FIR alleging a large-scale conspiracy involving the CPA and DGHS in the procurement of medicines, medical equipment, and hospital supplies.

    The complaint alleged that officials colluded with private suppliers by framing restrictive tender specifications, creating fake firms to obtain contracts, disqualifying genuine bidders, and making procurements at inflated rates, resulting in wrongful losses to the government and corresponding gains to private entities.

    The allegations also cover procurements of ORS sachets, portable digital X-ray machines, hospital bedsheets, C-arm equipment, anaesthesia workstations, and surgical consumables. Authorities have clarified that investigations into all procedural and administrative aspects of the procurement process remain ongoing.

    Important Highlights

    • The Delhi Health Department has rejected allegations of overpricing in CPA procurements based on GeM procurement records.
    • The report found that ORS sachets, portable digital X-ray machines, and hospital-grade bedsheets were purchased at rates comparable to other government institutions.
    • The department clarified that pricing alone cannot determine the legality of procurements, and broader investigations are continuing.
    • The ACB, Directorate of Vigilance, and Enforcement Directorate are separately investigating alleged procurement irregularities.
    • The inquiry relates to allegations of tender manipulation, vendor selection irregularities, and inflated procurement under the Central Procurement Agency.
  • West Bengal Health Panel Probes Four Private Hospitals Over Alleged Insurance Billing Fraud

    West Bengal Health Panel Probes Four Private Hospitals Over Alleged Insurance Billing Fraud

    The West Bengal Clinical Establishment Regulatory Commission has initiated an inquiry into allegations of fraudulent billing practices at four private hospitals following a complaint from a private insurance company. The insurer alleged unnecessary hospital admissions, prolonged hospital stays, manipulation of medical records, and inflated billing, prompting the Commission to examine the matter as a broader issue affecting healthcare billing practices.

    Insurance Company Flags Alleged Billing Irregularities

    According to the Commission, the written complaint names four private hospitals—one in Kolkata, one in Durgapur, and two in Siliguri. The insurer submitted four sample cases alleging fraudulent transactions, and all the hospitals have since filed written responses to the allegations.

    The Commission stated that although the hospitals responded only to the specific bills cited in the complaint, the matter would be examined as a wider issue concerning billing practices in private healthcare institutions.

    Allegations Include Unnecessary Admissions and Inflated Bills

    The insurance company alleged that patients were admitted despite there being no medical necessity, while some hospital stays were extended beyond the clinically required duration.

    It also alleged that single surgical procedures were divided into multiple bills to increase reimbursement amounts and that medical records were altered to justify the billing pattern submitted to the insurer.

    The Commission is examining these allegations as part of its inquiry.

    Commission Orders Refund in Separate Insurance Dispute

    In a related matter, the Commission directed a private hospital in Kolkata to refund ₹58,000 to a patient who had paid the amount after the insurer declined to settle a portion of the hospital bill.

    The hospital argued that the insurer had wrongly rejected the claim. However, the Commission held that any dispute regarding the rejected amount should have been resolved directly with the insurance company rather than recovering the amount from the insured patient.

    Commission Questions Recovery from Patient

    The Commission also heard another complaint involving a patient whose surgery cost exceeded more than twice the original estimate. Although the patient had health insurance coverage of ₹5 lakh, the hospital billed ₹4.21 lakh, of which the insurer approved only ₹2.64 lakh.

    Questioning the hospital’s approach, the Commission observed that charges disallowed by the insurer should not have been recovered from the patient. The hospital maintained that the insurer had incorrectly rejected part of the claim.

    The Commission is continuing its examination of the complaints and the hospitals’ responses.

    Important Highlights

    • The West Bengal Clinical Establishment Regulatory Commission is probing four private hospitals over alleged insurance billing irregularities.
    • The insurer alleged unnecessary admissions, prolonged hospitalisation, inflated billing, and manipulation of medical records.
    • All four hospitals have submitted written replies to the Commission.
    • In a separate case, the Commission directed a Kolkata hospital to refund ₹58,000 recovered from a patient after an insurance claim was partially rejected.
    • The Commission has questioned hospitals for recovering disputed insurance amounts directly from insured patients instead of pursuing the matter with the insurer.
  • Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Haryana Policy on In-Service Quota for MD/MS Admissions

    Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Haryana Policy on In-Service Quota for MD/MS Admissions

    The Punjab and Haryana High Court has upheld the Haryana Government’s September 2024 policy allowing all in-service government doctors to apply for admission to MD/MS courses under the 40% in-service quota, even if they have not completed two years of service in rural or remote areas. The Court held that the State has the authority to prescribe eligibility conditions for admissions under the in-service quota and that the policy is aimed at strengthening healthcare services in rural and difficult areas.

    Challenge to the Policy Rejected

    The Haryana Government’s September 2024 policy permits all in-service government doctors to apply for postgraduate medical admissions under the 40% in-service quota, irrespective of whether they have completed two years of service in rural or remote areas.

    A group of doctors challenged the policy, arguing that only those who had completed the mandatory rural, remote, or difficult area service should be eligible to compete under the in-service quota for MD/MS admissions.

    Rejecting the challenge, the High Court held that the State is competent to create a separate admission channel for in-service doctors and determine the eligibility criteria governing such admissions.

    Court Upholds State’s Objective

    The Court observed that the policy seeks to enable government-employed MBBS doctors to obtain postgraduate qualifications so that they can provide improved specialist healthcare services, particularly in rural and difficult areas.

    The Bench noted that the policy requires in-service doctors who have not completed rural service to execute a bond undertaking to serve the State Government for a minimum of five years in rural, remote, or difficult areas after acquiring their postgraduate qualification.

    According to the Court, this condition adequately advances the policy’s objective of strengthening healthcare delivery in underserved regions.

    Different Treatment for Two Categories of Doctors Found Valid

    The High Court also examined the distinction made between two categories of in-service doctors under the policy.

    Doctors who have already completed two years of service in rural, remote, or difficult areas are permitted to pursue postgraduate studies while continuing to receive their salary and other service benefits. In contrast, doctors who have not completed the required rural service are allowed to pursue postgraduate education without salary, although their continuity of service is maintained.

    The Court held that this classification is based on an intelligible differentia and bears a direct nexus with the objective of encouraging service in rural and difficult areas while improving the availability of specialist doctors.

    Court Refers to Earlier Government Notification

    The Bench also referred to the Haryana Government’s January 2018 notification, under which 46 blocks across various districts were identified as remote or difficult areas for providing incentives and other benefits to government doctors.

    The Court found no constitutional infirmity, manifest arbitrariness, or illegality in the September 2024 policy and dismissed the challenge to its validity.

    Important Highlights

    • The Punjab and Haryana High Court has upheld Haryana’s September 2024 policy on the 40% in-service quota for MD/MS admissions.
    • The policy allows all in-service government doctors to apply, even without completing two years of rural or remote service.
    • Doctors who have not completed rural service must execute a bond to serve for five years in rural, remote, or difficult areas after completing their postgraduate course.
    • The Court held that the State has the authority to prescribe eligibility conditions for admissions under the in-service quota.
    • The Bench ruled that the distinction between doctors who have completed rural service and those who have not is legally valid and supports the policy’s objective.