Case Law Details

Case Name : Afak Anwar Mandaviya Vs. Maharashtra Association of Resident Doctors (MARD) and others. (Bombay High Court)
Appeal Number : Public Interest Litigatin no. 77 Of 2015
Date of Judgement/Order : 23/03/2017
Related Assessment Year :
Courts : All High Courts (3798) Bombay High Court (681)

1. Additional affidavit in reply on behalf of Respondent No.1 is filed. Meanwhile, an intervention application on behalf of  the Association of Medical Consultants is placed before this Court in order to assist the Court to find ways and means to resolve the existing problem.

2. Learned Advocate General submits that subsequent to the incident in question, the concerned authorities have had emergent meetings and have resolved to deploy 1100 additional armed forces from the Maharashtra State Security Corporation who have all the capabilities of maintaining law and order in exigencies like normal police personnel. According to him, the first lot of 500 such security personnel would be deployed with effect from 5 April 2017 so far as city of Mumbai and the balance of them would be deployed by 30 April 2017.

3. Meanwhile, the grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of norms that not more than two attendants of a patient will be allowed to enter the hospital through the main gate itself has to be strictly implemented. This would include visitors visiting the patients during a particular visiting hours of the hospital. In other words, at any point of time, there may not be more than two attendants of a patient who can have entry in the hospital premises.

4. It is needless to say that the existing guards or the additional guards to be deployed would have to discharge their
duties strictly adhering to the instructions given to them, failing which the concerned management has to inform the concerned authority who is responsible to regulate the duties of the guards.

5. The Secretary of Respondent No.1 – Association brings to our notice that the Committee which is headed by Shri Justice V.C.Daga (Retd.) is in­charge of only one issue which is not covering the security and other general conditions of Resident Doctors in the Government and Corporation/Municipal hospitals. It is also brought to our notice that certain actions are already initiated against the members of the Association by the Management.

6. Be that as it may, we are of the opinion that the present situation has to be resolved amicably by sitting across the
table and not by adjudication of the matter. We keep the litigation listed once in a fortnight to see the progress as per the undertaking given both by the first respondent – Association as well as the State. We also direct the Association of Medical Consultants who has come forward as intervener, to be part of the conciliation proceedings, if any, in future between the parties. We rather request the Association of Medical Consultants to advise the first respondent – members of Association, being experienced consultants, what should be duties of Resident doctors and how best the matter could be amicably resolved between the parties.

7. In the above circumstances, we appreciate the undertaking of the President and the Secretary of the first respondent ­ Association that they would immediately take steps to request all the members to join the duties and the same taken as their undertaking and assurance.

8. Meanwhile, in the light of the above assurance of the first respondent ­Association, we direct the management of the Government hospitals as well as the Corporation/Municipal hospitals, not to take any punitive action till the next date of hearing, once the members/Doctors of the first respondent ­Association resume duties.

9. List the matter on 6 April 2017 at 3 p.m.

Also Read- Management can taken action against doctors on Strike: HC

Download Judgment/Order

More Under Corporate Law

Posted Under

Category : Corporate Law (3533)
Type : Judiciary (10298)
Tags : high court judgments (4104)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *