AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The petitioner has been placed under suspension on 23.03.2020, whereafter vide order dated 03.04.2020 his headquarter has been changed from Pali to Barmer.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been suspended because of extraneous consideration and vengeance, that too without assigning any reasons.
Though, order of suspension does not require to indicate reasons, but when the Court is seized of the matter, it is incumbent upon the authority to satisfy that valid grounds existed warranting suspension of a Government servant, particularly when it is a case of Assistant Professor - Medicine and that too in the present era of pandemic COVID-19.
The State has filed a reply and indicated that the petitioner has been negligent and had seen a patient without wearing gloves (on 20.03.2020), whose report dated 22.03.2020 showed him to be COVID infected. According to the respondents, petitioner has been suspended for this negligence, which could lead to disastrous results.
Various allegations have been levelled by the petitioner. Without going into the unwarranted and disputed facts, suffice it to note that on 21.03.2020, petitioner himself wrote to the respondent No.2 - Principal and Controller, Government Medical College, Pali that on 20.03.2020 he examined a patient without proper preventive measures/protection, who later on (20.03.2020) was found COVID positive. Feeling cough and headache, he quarantined himself to ward off community spread.
On 25.03.2020, petitioner sought permission to leave headquarter whereafter on 02.04.2020 he informed the respondent No.2 - Principal that his report is negative, thus he is willing to join and serve humanity.
Respondent No.2 not only referred him to join but also changed his headquarter from Pali to Barmer.
Record reveals that the Deputy Collector has written a letter to the CMHO, Pali to lodge FIR against the petitioner (Annex.R/3).
May be, petitioner has not taken utmost care and has examined a patient, without wearing gloves. But then, it cannot be ignored that by such time (20.03.2020) said patient was not diagnosed with COVID-19.
Be that as it may, no sooner had the petitioner realised that said patient is suffering from COVID, than he quarantined himself on 21.03.2020 and informed the Principal accordingly.
Till today, no charge-sheet has been served upon the petitioner.
The suspension in question reeks of over reaction, if not vengeance.
At this stage, this Court does not deem it appropriate to observe anything about petitioner's negligence or about respondents' action.
One cannot comprehend or approve the impugned action of the respondents against a doctor, who serve the system and who has fairly and boldly apprised the respondent No.2 about his lapse, coupled with the fact that thereafter he quarantined himself.
Prima facie, action of the respondents in suspending him and not revoking his suspension even after three months is nothing but a punishment, given the fact that even charge-sheet has not been served upon him.
Continuation of petitioner's suspension itself is against public interest, particularly in the era of wide spread pandemic. The society, rather humanity is in need of more doctors and health workers.
Admit. Issue notice. Mr. Vyas accepts notices.
As an upshot of the discussion foregoing, effect and operation of the order dated 23.03.2020 (Annex.4) placing the petitioner under suspension, so also the order dated 03.04.2020 (Annex.7) changing the headquarter of the petitioner, shall remain stayed during pendency of the present petition.
Stay application stands disposed of accordingly.
As a parting remark, this Court would like to record that having heard the matter so extensively, it could have decided the writ petition itself instead of deciding the stay application, but it desisted from doing so, as decision on merit either way would have impact on the discipline of the health worker or would otherwise demoralise them - either of the situation would not be conducive to present scenario.
This being the spirit of the order instant; any fact, notice or finding recorded herein will be treated to be only prima facie observation of the Court and would not affect rights of either of the parties, in case disciplinary proceedings are launched.
Needless to observe that the respondents shall be free to continue with the disciplinary enquiry (if deemed expedient) and the present order will not come in their way of proceeding with the enquiry.