High Court · 2025

W.P.No.16078 of 2024IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 20.08.2025CORAM :THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESHW.P.No.16078 of 2024Dr.N.Balasubramaniam..Petitionerv.1. Tamil Nadu Medical Council rep by the Registrar New No.914, Old No.569 Poonamallee High Road Arumbakkam Chennai 600 1062. Directorate of Medical and Rural Health Services rep by the Director No.359-361, DMS Complex Anna Salai, Chennai 600 0063. The Joint Director Directorate of Medical and Rural Health Services Race Course, Coimbatore 641 0184. Royal Care Super Speciality Hospital Ltd rep by its Managing Director L & T Bypass, Neelambur Coimbatore 641 062____________Page 1 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.16078 of 20245. The National Medical Commission Ethics and Medical Registration Board Pocket 14, Sector 8 Dwarka, Phase 1 New Delhi 110 077 ..Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to impugned order passed by the 1st respondent dated 12.12.2023 bearing Ref.No.TNMC/T.No.3811/2023 and quash the same and consequently direct the 1st respondent to pass a speaking order within a stipulated time after taking into consideration the report submitted by the State Government Appointed Committee in WP No.20995 of 2023.For Petitioner::Mr.R.Rajesh KumarFor Respondents ::Mr.U.BaranidharanAdditional Government Pleaderfor R1Mr.E.SundaramGovernment Advocate for R2 & R3Ms.S.Varsha for R4Ms.Shubharanjani Ananth for R5ORDERThis writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned proceedings of the first respondent dated 12.12.2023 and for a consequential direction to the first respondent to pass a speaking order, within the time frame fixed by this Court, after considering the report ____________Page 2 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.16078 of 2024submitted by the State Government Appointed Committee.2. Heard the respective learned counsel appearing for the parties.3. The case of the petitioner is that his father was admitted in the fourth respondent hospital and was given treatment and he was discharged from the hospital on 24.01.2020. Immediately thereafter, he fell ill and he was once again admitted in the fourth respondent hospital, where he developed severe infection and was administered with antibiotic drugs. As a consequence, his kidney failed and he had to undergo dialysis, until his demise on 01.09.2020. Under such circumstances, the petitioner gave a complaint to the first respondent to conduct enquiry and take action.4. The petitioner filed the earlier writ petition in W.P.No.20995 of 2023 for a direction to the first and second respondents to conduct enquiry based on the complaint given by the petitioner. When this writ petition was pending, a team of doctors was constituted and they submitted a report. The same was taken into consideration by this Court and the writ petition was ____________Page 3 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.16078 of 2024disposed of by an order dated 21.09.2023 in the following terms:-“2. Pursuant to the same, a re-enquiry indeed has been done by a team of Doctors constituted of Coimbatore Medical College Hospital, Coimbatore, and they came out with their opinion /observations, as below : ? An elderly patient (76 years) with loss of appetite, low grade fever and easy fatigability could have been evaluated for malignancy. ? Persistently high alkaline phosphatase along with bony sclerosis is a clue to underlying prostate malignancy apart from Pager's disease. Prostate malignancy could have been considered as the first differential diagnosis. ? Per rectal examination could have been done for an elderly patient. ? Serum PSA must have been suggested by the Urologist called for opinion, especially in this scenario. ? With multiple sites of infections, the relevant consultants could have preferably discussed and decided on single / double antimicrobial agents which are effective for all the sources of infection. Thereby, poly pharmacy and frequent antibiotic changes could have possibly been avoided. ? Patient had polyserositis. CB NAAT assay from two sites were weakly positive. Since patient was very sick and already diagnosed with prostate cancer, and being put on multiple antibiotics, ATT could have been deferred." ____________Page 4 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.16078 of 20243. The said report of the team of Doctors constituted of Coimbatore Medical College Hospital, Coimbatore, is hereby recorded. Since the object of the petition has been addressed, nothing survives for consideration. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed. No costs.”5. The grievance of the petitioner is that the first respondent, through the impugned proceedings dated 12.12.2023, without assigning reasons and without considering the report of the Committee, has passed the order stating that there was no professional misconduct on the part of the fourth respondent. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court. 6. Counter affidavits have been filed by the first and third respondents. 7. The grievance expressed by the petitioner is to the effect that the first respondent had passed the impugned order without assigning reasons and without dealing with the complaint given by the petitioner as well as the ____________Page 5 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.16078 of 2024report submitted by the Committee. On carefully going through the impugned proceedings of the first respondent, it is seen that the first respondent has straightaway rendered a finding that there was no professional misconduct on the part of the doctors in the fourth respondent hospital. There is nothing to show that the first respondent had applied their mind on the report that was submitted by the team of doctors constituted by the Coimbatore Medical College and Hospital, Coimbatore. That apart, there is also no indication as to whether the first respondent applied their mind on the specific allegations made by the petitioner. Hence, such order, which lacks reasons, has to be necessarily interfered with by this Court. 8. In the light of the above discussion, the impugned proceedings of the first respondent dated 12.12.2023 are quashed. The matter is remitted back to the file of the first respondent with a direction to the first respondent to conduct the enquiry based on the report that has been submitted by the Committee and pass a reasoned order, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. ____________Page 6 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.16078 of 20249. In the result, this writ petition is allowed with the above direction. No costs. Index : yes/no 20.08.2025Neutral citation : yes/no ssTo1. The Registrar Tamil Nadu Medical Council New No.914, Old No.569 Poonamallee High Road Arumbakkam, Chennai 600 1062. The Director Directorate of Medical and Rural Health Services No.359-361, DMS Complex Anna Salai, Chennai 600 0063. The Joint Director Directorate of Medical and Rural Health Services Race Course, Coimbatore 641 0184. The National Medical Commission Ethics and Medical Registration Board Pocket 14, Sector 8 Dwarka, Phase 1 New Delhi 110 077 ____________Page 7 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.16078 of 2024N.ANAND VENKATESH,J.ss W.P.No.16078 of 202420.08.2025____________Page 8 of 8