Did the Calcutta HC Uphold the Order Quashing the Transfer of a Junior Doctor Linked to the RG Kar Protest?
Click to start listening
Synopsis
In a significant legal victory, the Calcutta High Court upheld a ruling against the West Bengal government's attempt to transfer a junior doctor linked to protests after a tragic incident. The court's decision emphasizes the need for fairness in recruitment processes and reflects ongoing tensions in the healthcare sector. Explore the court's ruling and its implications.
Key Takeaways
- The Calcutta High Court quashed the transfer of Dr. Aniket Mahato.
- The ruling emphasizes procedural fairness and adherence to SOPs.
- Dr. Mahato's preferred posting will be at R.G. Kar Medical College and Hospital.
- Justice and transparency are crucial in recruitment processes.
- Political factors were suggested to influence the transfer decision.
Kolkata, Nov 6 (NationPress) A division bench of the Calcutta High Court on Thursday confirmed a previous ruling from a single bench that overturned the West Bengal government’s order to transfer a junior doctor. This doctor, who became a prominent figure during the protests following the tragic rape and murder of a female medical student at the state-operated R.G. Kar Medical College and Hospital in August of last year, was set to be relocated to a distant hospital in northern West Bengal.
The court's ruling nullifies the transfer of Dr. Aniket Mahato, who was designated as a “senior resident” at Raiganj Medical College and Hospital in North Dinajpur district.
This decision reinforces that Dr. Mahato will remain at R.G. Kar Medical College and Hospital, his preferred choice as indicated during the senior resident appointment counselling.
Following the judgment, Aniket expressed, “This is truly a triumph for justice and transparency. Seven months have gone by since this posting issue began. I have been away from my selected career for far too long. I sincerely hope that I will finally receive a posting in line with the court's decision and can resume my duties as a physician shortly. This entire situation feels like political retribution. I wish for future recruitment processes to be transparent and rule-compliant.”
Dr. Mahato was not the only junior doctor affected; two others, Debasish Halder and Asfaqulla Naiya, who also participated in the R.G. Kar protest, faced similar issues with their preferred postings.
In September, Justice Biswajit Basu had previously ruled that Aniket should be assigned to the anaesthesia department at R.G. Kar Medical College and Hospital. The court noted that the standard operating procedures were not properly followed in his case, thus infringing upon Article 14 of the Constitution, which addresses equality.
The state government, unhappy with this ruling, sought to suspend the order until October 7. However, Justice Basu rejected this request. The government then escalated the matter to a division bench.
On Thursday, the division bench, led by Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty, upheld the previous decision and dismissed the state’s appeal, affirming that the transfer order was arbitrary and breached procedural fairness.
Point of View
I believe this ruling serves as a crucial reminder of the importance of justice and transparency in public service positions. The court's decision underscores the necessity for adherence to procedures that ensure fairness, especially in sensitive matters affecting professionals like doctors. This case not only highlights individual rights but also reflects broader systemic issues within government recruitment practices.
NationPress
06/11/2025
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the reason for Dr. Aniket Mahato's transfer?
Dr. Aniket Mahato was transferred following his involvement in protests after the tragic incident of a female medical student's rape and murder.
What did the Calcutta High Court rule regarding the transfer?
The Calcutta High Court upheld a decision that quashed Dr. Mahato's transfer order, reaffirming his right to be posted at his preferred location.
Why is this ruling significant?
This ruling is significant as it emphasizes the need for transparency and adherence to proper procedures in government recruitment and postings.
How did Dr. Mahato react to the ruling?
Dr. Mahato expressed that the ruling is a victory for justice and hopes for a transparent recruitment process in the future.
What implications does this ruling have for other junior doctors?
The ruling sets a precedent that may benefit other junior doctors who faced similar unjust transfers or postings.
