Refrain from practising as super specialists: Delhi Medical Council to Fortis' doctors
The Delhi Medical Council (DMC) has asked two doctors of Fortis Hospital in Shalimar Bagh to refrain from claiming neonatologist status and practising as super specialists amid an ongoing inquiry.
In a letter to the medical superintendent of the hospital, the council informed that the two doctors — Dr Akhilesh Singh and Dr Vivek Jain — cannot claim the status. 'Their credentials as qualified pediatricians are also pending inquiry,' the DMC said. The council wrote the letter to the hospital based on a complaint received against the two doctors and a Delhi High Court order that followed. The Delhi Medical Council's Executive Committee has also sought a reply from the private hospital and the doctors.
In a statement, Fortis Hospital, Shalimar Bagh, said that the order has been passed without their knowledge or opportunity for the doctors to present their case.
'We are astonished by the recent order, which seems to have been passed without our knowledge or opportunity for the doctors to present their case. The lack of prior notice for any hearing raises concerns about the order's validity. Notably, the Delhi Medical Council's 2023 affidavit to the Hon'ble High Court did not question the doctors' qualifications, making this development surprising. We are currently reviewing the order and will take appropriate legal action. Given the matter's sub judice status, we will refrain from further comments at this time,' said Fortis Hospital.
While Dr Vivek Jain refused to comment on the matter, Dr Akhilesh said he has not received the DMC order yet.
A writ petition was filed in the Delhi High Court against the two doctors, where the mother of a five-year-old boy alleged that the hospital deliberately concealed his birth injury and deprived him of timely treatment.
According to the petition filed by Advocate Sachin Jain on behalf of the woman, her child suffered brain hypoxic injury at Fortis Hospital during his birth in 2017.
The woman alleged that the hospital concealed this injury from her by fabricating the child's medical records. 'The child eventually became permanently vegetative and developed a rare medical condition known as 'West Syndrome'. He is living in deep pain and suffering from a high degree of epilepsy and cerebral palsy,' the petition underlined.
She also claimed that the child remained in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) at Fortis Hospital for 11 days after birth. Then, Dr Vivek Jain and Dr Akhilesh Singh discharged the child, stating that there is no sign of any injury.
Jain also submitted a complaint with the DMC and alleged that the two doctors are unqualified but have been practising in the Neonatal ICU at Fortis Hospital, Shalimar Bagh, New Delhi.
'They don't even possess the requisite qualifications to be an expert or a specialist. Yet, they are practicing in these critical units of a super-speciality hospital and administering treatment to critically ill neonates and infants, thereby posing a serious threat to their lives and limbs,' he said.
In March, the High Court directed the DMC and National Medical Council to file an affidavit on the qualifications of the two doctors.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
2 days ago
- Time of India
SC grants relief to Cancer patient accused in NDPS case, stays order to surrender
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday granted relief to a woman suffering from cancer, who is an accused in a case registered under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. The Delhi High Court had earlier denied her further interim bail on medical grounds and directed her to surrender. However, the Supreme Court has stayed the High Court's order. A vacation bench of Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice Manmohan stayed the direction to petitioner Jyoti to surrender. The bench issued notice has been issued to Delhi State. "In the meanwhile, the direction to petitioner to surrender shall remain stayed," the apex court ordered. The matter has been listed for a hearing on June 27. Petitioner Jyoti moved the Supreme Court after denial of further interim bail by the Delhi High Court. She was order to surrender on on June 15 before the jail authorities. However, she was hospitalised on the intervening night of June 13 and 14, 2025. Senior advocate Amit Chaddha, alongwith advocates Sarthak Sethi and Furkan Hassan appeared for the petitioner. The plea stated that the petitioner's health deteriorated during the intervening night of June 13-14 as she started experiencing severe breathlessness, weakness, and weakness in her limbs, and subsequently collapsed. "She was immediately rushed to the hospital. Considering her condition, the doctors advised admitting her under close supervision and observation. The petitioner is currently receiving appropriate medical care," the plea said. The Delhi High Court on June 13 refused to grant further interim bail to petitioner after noting the submissions of prosecution that ailment can certainly be taken care of even during her stay in jail. However, the court had directed that she be provided the best treatment at the hospital of her choice at the expense of the government. The High Court had said, "The accused, being in judicial custody, it is the duty of the state to ensure her well-being and right to good health." The High Court considered the submissions that she is a bad character in the area. She has 29 cases against her, of which four are under the NDPS Act. In the present case, 480 grams of heroin were recovered from the accused Jyoti. "I find substance in submission that the rigours of Section 37 NDPS Act cannot be ignored by the Court," Justice Girish Kathpalia observed in the order passed on June 13. On June 6, the Delhi High Court granted interim bail to an accused, Jyoti, till June 15. She had approached the High Court after the trial court refused to extend her interim bail on June 4. "The applicant is enlarged on interim bail on medical grounds till.15.06.2025 subject to the applicant furnishing a personal bond of Rs . 1,00,000 with one surety of the like amount subject to the satisfaction of the Jail Superintendent/Trial Court," the high court ordered on June 4. Petitioner was granted interim bail on May 19, 2025 till June 5 on the medical grounds in view of her condition by the trial court. She was arrested by the crime branch in an FIR lodged in 2023. Senior advocate Amit Chaddha, counsel for the Petitioner, had submitted that as per the diagnosis report dated June 2 of the hospital, Petitioner Jyoti is suffering from Chronic Lymphocytic Leukaemia . This is an uncommon and rare kind of cancer.
Time of India
2 days ago
- Time of India
Delhi government entrusts doctors' registration to DGHS
New Delhi: The Delhi government has assigned the responsibility of doctors' registration in the national capital to the Directorate General of Health Services (DGHS), Health Minister Pankaj Singh said on Wednesday. The move comes following the dissolution of the Delhi Medical Council (DMC). "In light of the Lieutenant Governor's decision to dissolve the DMC, we have transferred its powers to the DGHS, which will now act as the registrar for doctors in Delhi," Singh said. Lt Governor V K Saxena approved the proposal for the dissolution of the DMC after allegations of irregularities. He has also directed the health department to reconstitute the DMC within two months. Singh said, "Any irregularities or corruption within the DMC -- whether procedural or financial -- will also be thoroughly investigated." Officials from the health department had sent a proposal to Saxena seeking control of the body under Section 29 of the DMC Act, 1997. The DMC is a statutory body responsible for regulating the practice of medicine in the national capital and ensuring that private doctors follow ethics. Meanwhile, speaking on the issue of counterfeit cancer medicines , the minister said the government has gone into alert mode after receiving complaints about fake drugs circulating in the market. "160 samples of cancer medicines were collected randomly from across the city and sent for lab testing," the minister told PTI. "We have collected samples from 160 locations. The test results are expected in three to four days. If any sample is found to be fake, strict legal action will be taken," he said. He urged cancer patients in Delhi, "Please ensure you are buying from genuine sources. If you suspect any fake or duplicate medicines, report them to us immediately - we will take strong action against those involved."
Hindustan Times
3 days ago
- Hindustan Times
Health minister issues order dissolving Delhi Medical Council
New Delhi Delhi health minister Pankaj Singh on Wednesday issued an order to dissolve the Delhi Medical Council (DMC) and reconstitute a new council within two months, a day after lieutenant governor (LG) VK Saxena approved a government proposal in this regard and called for the dissolution of the statutory body over allegations of irregularities, especially extending retirement age of ex-registrar Dr Girish Tyagi. The minister said that the director-general of health services (DGHS), Dr Rati Makkar, will take charge as the interim registrar of the DMC. However, DMC officials said they did not get any communication in this regard. Health minister Singh told HT, 'The proposal from the LG office was approved last night. Today, we have issued a formal order to DMC. There are alleged reports of irregularities by DMC which now will be probed following which action will be taken against the members of DMC who were involved in the alleged irregularities and abuse of powers.' He said, 'As of now, DGHS director will be the registrar of the council. She will further appoint two other officials who will also look into the duties of DMC.' The issue at hand pertains to the extension of former registrar Dr Girish Tyagi's tenure beyond the age limit of 60, first to 65 and then for an additional year. On May 13, HT reported that amid allegations of mismanagement and irregularities in DMC's functioning, the health department sent a file titled 'Proposal for control of government over Delhi Medical Council under Section 29 of the DMC Act, 1997' to LG VK Saxena, recommending the council's dissolution. In an order issued late Tuesday, the LG said: 'I have perused the proposal regarding dissolution of Delhi Medical Council for a specified period under Section 29 of the Delhi Medical Council Act, 1997. It is observed that the Health Department has rightly pointed out the irregularity wherein the DMC unilaterally extended the retirement age of the Registrar from 60 years to 65 years without Government approval and further extended his term by one year with effect from 1Jan 2024, Additionally, in response to the Show Cause Notice dated 6, Feb, 2025, the DMC merely stated that Dr Tyagi resigned with immediate effect but did not address the unauthorised extension, which resulted in Dr Tyagi serving over five years beyond the normal retirement age.' 'Health Department may be directed to initiate the process for the reconstitution of the Delhi Medical Council in accordance with the provisions of the Act, ensuring that the entire process is completed within two months,' the order said. Dr Tyagi joined DMC as deputy registrar in June 2007 and was elevated as the registrar in July 2008. As he was set to retire at the age of 60 in November 2019, a DMC amendment in February 2019 extended his retirement age to 65. When he turned 65 on November 3, the council on November 11 approved an additional year's extension from December 1, 2024. On Wednesday, Dr Tyagi said that the matter of his one-year extension was currently sub judice and he had taken an extension following due process. 'The council gave a year extension as per Section 36 of the DMC Act and informed the Delhi government. The Delhi government itself has given in the first affidavit justifying the same in the high court of Delhi in writ petition. Meanwhile, the high court is examining this matter WP 61152/24.' A member of the DMC, on condition of anonymity, said, 'The only irregularity that the health department has pointed out is the extension of the registrar's term. It is interesting to note that the extension was done by the previous council (2014–2019) and not the present one. Then, on what basis are these allegations being made against the council and it is being dissolved? Further, the matter of extension of the registrar is also sub judice, so in future, if the court finds that the extension was done as per the law, will the government then reinstate the council?' DMC was established in September 1998 as per the Delhi Medical Council Act, 1997, which was enacted by the government of the NCT of Delhi. DMC is an autonomous statutory body whose primary role is to regulate the practice of doctors in Delhi and ensure ethical practices are followed by private doctors.
