Doctor Gets HC Warning After Challenging Suspension as Punishment for Ragging
Ragging
Ahmedabad: The Gujarat High Court recently warned to impose a fine on a postgraduate medical student for challenging the suspension that he received as a punishment for ragging a junior.
When the HC bench expressed its disinclination to entertain the plea and warned of a fine, the concerned doctor withdrew the petition from the Court.
Medical Dialogues had earlier reported about this incident of ragging at Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation Medical Education Trust (AMC MET)-affiliated Narendra Modi Medical College in Maninagar, where taking cognisance of the ragging activities directed at the junior doctors, the college had suspended four senior doctors in this connection.
The junior doctors involved in this connection suffered mental agony during these horrific episodes of ragging. They were reportedly forced to write prescriptions 700 times and were denied food for up to seven days.
After a complaint was filed in this regard before the Medical College Council, inquiries were conducted leading to the suspension of two male and two female doctors. Among them, one of the doctors, Dr. Vaghani had been suspended for two years, Dr. Patel for one year. The other two doctors- Dr. Pareija and Dr. Nayak were suspended for 25 days.
However, challenging his two-year suspension, Dr. Vaghani approached the Gujarat High Court and claimed that he was not even provided with a copy of the complaint, the Times of India has reported. On the other hand, the medical college and Gujarat University disputed the claim.
TOI has reported that when the petitioner's counsel insisted on the issuance of notice, the Court set a condition of Rs 5 lakh deposit. After consulting the doctor, his counsel expressed the willingness to deposit Rs 1 lakh. However, later he withdraw the plea since the court was highly critical of the ragging incident.
Accordingly, the court allowed the lawyer to withdraw the plea while noting in the order that permission was sought "to withdraw the petition since according to the petitioner, some of the representations made by the petitioner are pending with the respondents (the university) and, therefore, the petitioner wants the said representations to be decided by the respondents."
