NMC vs MCI Employees: SC Favours With NMC

The National Medical Commission (NMC) has now substituted the old body of the Medical Council of India (MCI). This came as heart breaking news for 92 workers. These workers belonged to MCI. These workers were terminated from their jobs when NMC came into power. Adding salt to the wounds, the Supreme Court has passed order of contempt of court.

UU Lalit was heading the three-member bench in SC. He handled the case and upheld the NMC’s decision. He also said that the workers would need to pass on it at home till the Delhi High Court’s final decision. SC mentioned that, nonetheless, their pay rates and advantages during this period would be secured.

The termination of employment of these employees came into effect due to arrangements of the NMC Act. According to provisions of the Act, the employees of recently abolished MCI will not be retained in the newly constituted medical regulator.

Employees were in utter shock when they came to know about the provisions of the NMC Act. The provisions said that the employees under MCI will be removed from the job with 3 months severance package as and when NMC comes to power.  Section 60 deals with issues related to employees. The Chairman and different Members and workers of the Medical Council of India will empty their workplaces and be qualified for the pay. As they are under premature termination, they will be paid not less than the quarter of the year’s salary and other benefits.

MCI workers were asked to leave the office by the Union Health Ministry. This included more than 92 perpetual workers of the recent MCI. It was claimed that the representatives of MCI were engaged with corruption consequently they would not be obliged in the NMC.

Amit Biswas, who is Under Secretary of Health Ministry, issued a circular on 5 October 2020 which said that since the National Medical Commission has constituted and their smooth working is crucial. The employees are required to clear the workplaces with a quick impact.

The circular also expressed that according to the high court request their administrations will proceed as they have been asked only to abandon the office. Notwithstanding, the representatives fought the circular considering it as an infringement of the court’s norm request.

The workers had moved a hatred request with the HC. They had filed a petition for the abolition of section 60 of the NMC Act which accommodates the disintegration of the MCI and excursion of the workplaces by its authorities.

The High court was not happy with the Center and NMC’s decision on October 5 to close down the PCs of the MCI authorities. The decision also included the removal of the biometric attendance machine and guiding them to clear the premises by October 7.

The high court bench also noted that they see no rhyme or reason why public cash is being wasted as such by forestalling the candidates (MCI authorities and representatives) from releasing from their functions.

The court decided to postpone its decision. However, the court had coordinated that the PCs of the MCI authorities would be made practical and the biometric arrangement of participation will be set up back.

NMC moved to the Supreme Court after the non-promising decision by the high court. Senior Advocate, Vikas Singh working for Commission contended that however as far as Section 60 of the Act, there would be an end of the business, in yielding to the request passed by the High Court, all the concerned writ candidates were being paid compensation and payments no matter what. There will be huge chaos if the concerned representatives were to be allowed to rejoin the workplaces. It will ultimately make a great impact on the working of the National Medical Commission.

Defending the contention made by Advocate Vikas Singh, the employee’s advocate presented that “the group of writ applicants contained Peons, Drivers, Lift Operators, Clerks, and Ministerial staff and the majority of them would not be doing any normal office work. It was additionally presented that it would be embarrassing for a worker to get compensation and payments without placing in any work on his part.

However, this didn’t move the peak court to alter its perspective and the court noted that:

Since the first writ appeal is forthcoming where the legitimacy of the 2019 Act is being referred to, at this stage, in our thought about the view, allowing workers to return to the workplaces may not be appropriate. The court is of the view that there would no discrimination as they are getting paid. Also, it depends upon the employer how he wants to react on this.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here