No HC relief for doctor temporarily debarred by MMC for ‘fraud’

No HC relief for doctor temporarily debarred by MMC for ‘fraud’

A single-judge bench of Justice Burgess P Colabawalla through video conference heard the plea filed by the doctor seeking a relaxation in the temporary ban on him so that he can render his services as medical professional amid COVID-19 pandemic.

Written by Omkar Gokhale | Mumbai | Updated: May 6, 2020 12:21:02 pm
Voter ID card sufficient proof of citizenship, rules Mumbai court The FCPS is a specialised medical degree and is higher than MBBS and Diploma in Anaesthesia, which the doctor had secured in 1997 and 2001, respectively. (Representational Image)

The Bombay High Court Monday refused to grant interim relief to a doctor, whose name had been removed from the register of medical practitioners for a year after a probe revealed that he had fraudulently used Fellowship by College of Physicians and Surgeons (FCPS) degree without clearing the exam.

The FCPS is a specialised medical degree and is higher than MBBS and Diploma in Anaesthesia, which the doctor had secured in 1997 and 2001, respectively.

A single-judge bench of Justice Burgess P Colabawalla through video conference heard the plea filed by the doctor seeking a relaxation in the temporary ban on him so that he can render his services as medical professional amid COVID-19 pandemic.

Advocate Zaid Ansari, for the petitioner, said the Maharashtra Medical Council (MMC) had on March 15 issued an order and prohibited the doctor from practicing for a year after the MMC and the College of Physicians and Surgeons (CPS) found that he had used FCPS title without clearing the exam and, therefore, held he was not eligible to practice.

Ansari told the court that in January last year, the MMC issued showcause notice on the doctor and in July that year held a meeting with CPS where it was allegedly revealed that the doctor had indulged in fraud. Though my client was present for the meeting, an arbitrary order was passed by the MMC, Ansari said and sought that it to be set aside by the high court.

The bench observed that as the allegations against the doctor were of serious nature and it cannot grant interim reliefs but directed the state to respond on the plea within four weeks.