Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Dr. Shubash Singh, an orthopedic surgeon practicing in Panvel since 1992, challenged an order dated 9 July 2014 passed by the Maharashtra Medical Council suspending his registration under the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (PCPNDT Act). The petitioner's hospital had purchased a sonography machine in December 2002, which was registered under the Act. However, after the gynecologist left in 2005, the machine became non-functional and non-repairable, lying idle since 2006. On 23 and 24 June 2011, the appropriate authority inspected the hospital and was informed of the machine's non-use, supported by a certificate from the manufacturer. Despite this, the respondent council suspended the petitioner's registration on the ground that he failed to intimate the non-use of the machine to the appropriate authority. The court examined whether such suspension was valid under Section 23 of the PCPNDT Act. The court noted that the petitioner had explained the situation during inspection and produced evidence of non-use. The court held that Section 23 does not empower suspension for mere non-intimation of non-use; the provision applies to active violations like sex selection. The court also observed that the respondent did not provide an opportunity of hearing before passing the suspension order, violating natural justice. Consequently, the court quashed the suspension order and directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's explanation afresh. The writ petition was allowed.
Headnote
A) Medical Law - PCPNDT Act - Suspension of Registration - Section 23 of Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 - The court considered whether suspension of a medical practitioner's registration for failing to intimate non-use of a sonography machine is valid. The court held that Section 23 does not provide for suspension for non-intimation of non-use; the machine was non-functional and not used for sex selection. The court quashed the suspension order and directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's explanation. (Paras 1-13) B) Administrative Law - Natural Justice - Opportunity of Hearing - The court noted that the respondent did not provide an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner before suspending registration. The court held that such action violates principles of natural justice. (Paras 10-13)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the suspension of the petitioner's registration under the PCPNDT Act for non-intimation of non-use of a sonography machine is valid under Section 23 of the Act.
Final Decision
The court quashed the suspension order dated 9 July 2014 and directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's explanation afresh. The writ petition was allowed.
Law Points
- Suspension of registration under PCPNDT Act requires active violation
- not mere non-use of machine
- Non-intimation of non-use is not a ground for suspension under Section 23
- Appropriate authority must consider explanation before recommending suspension
