Private doctors did COVID service on own will hence cannot demand 1 Crore ex-gratia, Govt tells court

Published On 2022-02-26 10:52 GMT   |   Update On 2022-02-26 10:52 GMT

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Friday adjourned sine die the plea challenging the legality and constitutional validity of a Delhi government's decision to exclude private doctors from its compensation policy related to the kin of doctors who died due to COVID-19 while performing their duty during the outbreak of the pandemic.

Justice V Kameswar Rao adjourned the matter after hearing the submission of the Counsels for the Delhi Government and for the petitioner.

The Medical Dialogues team had earlier reported about this plea which was filed in the Delhi High Court challenging the legality and constitutional validity of the Delhi government's decision to exclude private doctors from its compensation policy related to the kin of doctors who died due to COVID-19 while performing their duty during the outbreak of the pandemic.

Also Read:1 crore ex-gratia to COVID warriors - Why are private practitioners excluded, asks plea

The counsel for the Delhi Government submitted that the victim, who is a doctor, in this case, was 85 years of age and was running his own private clinic. He was neither assigned nor impaneled for COVID-19 duty by the Delhi government. He is not covered under the scheme. The Delhi government submitted that the doctor had decided to see patients out of his own will, even when the Union Ministry of Health had asked the people of a particular age group to be careful, reports the Indian Express.

Further, the government said that Rs 1 crore is a huge sum of money, adding that the people's money has to be spent with care and caution. The government counsel, Satyakam, submitted, "We have to see our pocket. This is an ex-gratia scheme. This is not a statutory scheme where money has to be given to people under an obligation. This gentleman was a doctor of 85 years of age, 1935 was his date of birth. He died unfortunately of Covid on April 19, 2021. Can that be by any stretch of imagination burdened on public exchequer?"

The government argued that the scheme is a policy decision and age in the case before it is relevant, reports the Indian Express. Stating that the petition does not disclose the type of services the doctor was providing, the counsel for the government submitted, "The Government of India time and again said that people 62 years and above should be very careful. Every doctor cannot be given parity. It will create a chaotic situation."

On the other hand, Advocate Ashok Agarwal submitted that the issue related to private doctors is pending before the division bench of the High Court and the Supreme Court. The bench adjourned the matter sine die till the disposal of those petitions.

The court was hearing the petition filed by the spouse of the deceased doctor who used to practice at his private clinic at Vishwas Nagar and who had made a representation on February 6 to the government for grant of the ex-gratia amount. The plea stated that the Delhi government had excluded private doctors and paramedical staff from its policy of ex-gratia grant worth Rs 1 crore to the kin of 'Corona Warriors' who died due to coronavirus while they were performing their COVID-19 duties.

The petitioner whose partner died due to COVID-19 in April last year, states in her petition that the decision of the Delhi government is in violation of the fundamental right of the petitioner's husband as guaranteed to him under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

The plea further submits that, since the onset of the COVID 19 pandemic in February/ March 2020, all government health authorities of as well as private hospitals have been urging all the doctors to their services and attend patients due to inadequate public health infrastructure to deal with the outbreak.

"All clinics, nursing homes, hospitals were asked to pitch in to manage the sheer numbers. It is also submitted that doctors and facilities were even asked to even attend patients who can be managed without hospitalization. It is a fact that private practitioners were the first point of contact for a sick patient. A patient with fever always first approaches his/her family physician who treats him even as he prescribes the patient a test of COVID 19," reads the plea.

Advocate Ashok Aggarwal and Kumar Utkarsh, counsel for the petitioner, further stated in the plea, "COVID 19 pandemic was fought by both private and government doctors, jointly as a challenge, they rose to the unseen enemy despite huge personal risk. Healthcare workers both from the private and public sectors lost their lives worldwide. The disease did not discriminate based on the status of employment, gender, age even pregnant healthcare workers died. It is also submitted that COVID-19 martyrs according to media reports or IMA sources is about 1700 doctors across the country. In fact, private practitioners of general physician had significant limitations in terms of protective equipment and still continued their duty, more out of commitment, rather than for financial gains."

"Cabinet decision to discriminate between doctors deployed by government and private doctors, who were also giving their selfless service during the COVID-19 outbreak, is totally arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary, unjust, unreasonable, illegal and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India," it added.

It is submitted that "respondent Delhi government has arbitrarily, without proper application of mind has determined that sacrifice of private doctors is less than doctors deployed by respondent Government."

"It is also submitted that both Government and private doctors were doing their duty, serving the mankind in face of an unforeseen pandemic of unimaginable magnitude," reads the petition. The petitioner, in its plea, submitted that it is "sickening' that the discrimination is being made after the demise of doctors.

Also Read:Distinction between doctors, paramedics for COVID ex gratia by Delhi Govt not justified: HC

Tags:    
Article Source : with inputs

Disclaimer: This website is primarily for healthcare professionals. The content here does not replace medical advice and should not be used as medical, diagnostic, endorsement, treatment, or prescription advice. Medical science evolves rapidly, and we strive to keep our information current. If you find any discrepancies, please contact us at corrections@medicaldialogues.in. Read our Correction Policy here. Nothing here should be used as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. We do not endorse any healthcare advice that contradicts a physician's guidance. Use of this site is subject to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and Advertisement Policy. For more details, read our Full Disclaimer here.

NOTE: Join us in combating medical misinformation. If you encounter a questionable health, medical, or medical education claim, email us at factcheck@medicaldialogues.in for evaluation.

Our comments section is governed by our Comments Policy . By posting comments at Medical Dialogues you automatically agree with our Comments Policy , Terms And Conditions and Privacy Policy .

Similar News