Jaipur: The bench of Justice Mahendar Kumar Goyal upheld the order of compulsory retirement as punishment by Rajasthan Public Service Commission (RSPC), Ajmer to a government medical officer for submitting a factually wrong injury report. The High Court denied any relief to the medical officer and termed the wrong report as dereliction of duty.
The relevant facts in brief are that the medical officer while posted as Medical Officer, Community Health Centre, Todaraisingh (Tonk), furnished wrong facts in the injury report prepared upon medical examination of Shri Babu Lal. The medical officer while examining Shri Babu Lal found the injury No.1, a sharp edged injury on shoulder of the injured to be 3 centimeter in length and the injury No.2, another sharp edged injury on head of the injured of 2 centimeter. While the Medical board constituted to find the facts found that the injury No.1 to be 11.25 centimeter in length while injury No. 2 to be 3.75 centimeter in length. Effectively a perusal of the material on record reveals a great variance in the injury report prepared by the petitioner with the medical report prepared by the Medical Board. The Rajasthan Public Service Commissioner held the enquiry in accordance with procedure prescribed under Rule 16 of the Rules of 1958 by forming medical board. The Inquiry Officer and the disciplinary authority, agreeing with the findings of the Inquiry Officer, punished the medical officer with the punishment of compulsory retirement with proportionate pension.
The medical officer counsel assailed the quantum of punishment and submitted that the medical officer had measured the dimension of injuries received by injured-Babu Lal through naked eye which might have resulted into some variation. The medical officer counsel submitted that before passing the impugned order of punishment the medical officer service of 23 years should be considered. Also the medical officer counsel prayed before the high court that the punishment of compulsory retirement with proportionate pension is highly disproportionate as compared to the submission of faulty injury report. The medical officer counsel hence prayed that the writ petition be allowed to the extent of modification of the punishment order by substituting it with lighter punishment. The State Counsel submitted that the punishment awarded to the petitioner is on lighter side taking a lenient view of the matter which does not warrant any interference by this Court under its writ jurisdiction. The State Counsel therefore prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.
READ ALSO : UP MBBS interns demand stipend hike, boycott duties
The bench after hearing both sides observed that medical officer had submitted false report and committed dereliction in discharge of his duty. The bench added that none can undermine the importance of true and correct medico-legal report in the injury cases which has great role in just and fair disposal of the cases. Such a conduct by the Medical Officer is highly despicable as it causes interference with the administration of justice. To conclude the court said that it does not find the punishment awarded to the medical officer by the disciplinary authority based on concurrence of the RPSC to be shockingly disproportionate to the conscience so as to warrant interference of the Court under its limited writ jurisdiction. Hence the court dismissed the civil writ petition for being devoid of merit.
