No government doctor must be deputed abroad: Madras high court

Chennai: Pulling up the state government for sending a doctor in government service to foreign service, the Madras high court has said the government servant, who is rendering such public services, should not, for any reason, be sent on deputation out of India and it is high time, the government took appropriate steps as a matter of policy, as are necessary to ensure that none of the doctors from our country are deputed to any other country either on deputation or otherwise, when already there is a dearth of such professionals in our country.

 Justice R.Mahadevan made the observation while dismissing a petition from Dr.D.Lilly Manoharan represented by her power agent and husband T.Alexandar Devaraj, which sought to quash an order of the state health secretary, removing her from service, for overstaying abroad without permission.

The judge said the petitioner's wife was a doctor by profession and it is not known as to why she should be sent out of India, when she was in government service. When the country is already facing a dearth of medical professional proportionate to attend to those suffering from various ailments, sending a doctor in government service to foreign service is not justifiable. Medical profession is one of the noblest professions among all the professions, through out the world. The responsibilities attached to the post of a doctor are lesser than the privileges they could enjoy. Doctor is considered as a savior at all times and is highly responsible person, who can save human life. It is the most demanding profession throughout the globe, the judge added.

Dismissing the petition, the judge said even though the authorities have initiated disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner’s wife during the year 1997 for her overstay abroad beyond the one permitted, when she came back to India during the year 2002, surprisingly, she was permitted to join duty without any observation as to the continuance of the departmental proceedings against her, even after her joining, during 2003. In fact, after issuing show cause notice during 1997, nothing has progressed till 2003, when the petitioner’s wife was unceremoniously permitted to join duty. Further she once again remained absent and at least at this stage, the authorities ought to have swiftly proceeded with the departmental proceedings. Ultimately, the authorities have suspended her from service on March 30, 2004, one day prior to her retirement and retained their right to proceed against her departmentally. Thereafter, the authorities conducted enquiry and passed an order on January 25, 2015, removing her from service, which was questioned in this petition. “Thus, the inaction on the part of the respondents (authorities) has been given rise to the filing of the present petition by the petitioner claiming equity, which the respondents (authorities) could have avoided. Therefore, this court specifically directs that the respondents (health authorities) herein and all other departments shall not repeat such lapses in future and ensure that steps are taken then and there, when delinquency is committed by the government servant”, the judge added.