Delhi High Court - Orders
Dr. P. S. Kiran vs The President Delhi Medical Council & ... on 7 May, 2021
Author: Navin Chawla
Bench: Navin Chawla
$~9
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 3795/2021
DR. P. S. KIRAN ..... Petitioner
Through Mr.Bharat Singh, Adv.
versus
THE PRESIDENT DELHI MEDICAL
COUNCIL & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through Mr.Praveen Khattar, Adv. for R-1.
Mr.T.Singhdev, Mr.Abhijit
Chakravarty, Ms.Sumangla Swami,
Advs. for R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
ORDER
% 07.05.2021 This hearing has been held through video conferencing. CM 11404/2021 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
WP(C) 3795/2021
1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner praying inter alia for the following reliefs:
"A. It is, therefore, prayed that considering the facts and circumstances of the case this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the present petition and to issue a Writ of Mandamus in favour of the petitioner and against all the respondents and its officials to compensate the petitioner in terms of the losses occurred by the petitioner which included cost of the Litigation, damages with respect to mental harassment and agony faced by the petitioner and as well as strict penal action be taken against the official who are responsible for the negligence caused to the petitioner.
B. Direction be given to all the respondents for compensating the petitioner in as much as the losses have suffered by the petitioner in terms of her private practice which would have certainly performed by the petitioner in private institutions as stated above at the rate of present market remuneration is given to the Senior Radiologist in the interest of Justice."
2. The cause of action pleaded by the petitioner for filing of the present petition is the delayed recognition to the Diploma in the Medical Radiology- Diagnosis, obtained by the petitioner from the respondent no.3.
3. Being aggrieved of the non-recognition granted, the petitioner had earlier filed a writ petition before the High Court of Madras, being W.P. No. 3124 of 2018. The same was disposed of by the High Court vide its order dated 28.08.2019, directing as under:
"5. In the said circumstances, the 1st respondent herein is directed to communicate about the affiliation of the Institute under the Madras University till 1986 and the genuineness of the Diploma certificate and the information furnished under the Right to Information Act to the petitioner by the University of Madras certifying the petitioner as a student of the 1st respondent institute. On receipt of such communication, the 2nd respondent herein shall recognize the diploma of the petitioner and register the same. The 1st respondent shall complete the above direction within a period of four weeks and on receipt of the proposal from the 1st respondent, the 2nd respondent shall pass appropriate orders within a period of three weeks from thereafter."
4. The present petition has now been filed by the petitioner praying for the litigation costs and damages from the respondents for the alleged mental harassment and agony faced by the petitioner due to the delay caused in the entire process because of which the petitioner alleges that the petitioner could not follow her vocation.
5. In my opinion, the present petition is not maintainable. The petitioner having already invoked her remedy in form of a petition before the High Court of Madras, could have claimed all the reliefs in the said petition. Even otherwise, a claim of compensation would require disputed questions of fact to be determined. The same cannot be determined merely on the basis of affidavits of the parties and may require evidence to be led. The proper course therefore, for the petitioner would be in form of a Civil Suit, if at all maintainable.
6. In view of the above, the present petition is dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioner to pursue her alternate remedies, if so advised, in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs.
7. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merit of the claim of the petitioner or on the maintainability of an alternate proceedings.
NAVIN CHAWLA, J MAY 7, 2021 RN/P