The composition of the Disciplinary Committee and the eligibility criteria for appointment of experts were discussed, highlighting the lack of statutory force in the order of the respondent DMC and the absence of grounds for setting aside the decision.

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.

1. The petition impleading the respondent Delhi Medical Council (DMC) as the sole respondent impugns (i) “the illegal modification approved in the meeting of the respondent DMC dated 16th November, 2011 whereby the eligibility criteria of qualification for appointment of experts was arbitrarily and perversely lowered down”; and further seeks that (ii) “consequently the hearing, proceedings and order dated 17th November, 2011 in a Complaint No.780/2010 of the petitioner before the respondent DMC as also the final approved order dated 18th July, 2012 be also quashed”.

2. It is the case of the petitioner:-

(i) that the respondent DMC is the statutory body constituted under the Delhi Medical Council Act, 1997 (DMC Act) and has function inter alia to conduct hearing on complaints of medical negligence and professional misconduct against the medical practitioners and to give its decision thereon;

(ii) that the father of the petitioner late Shri P.K. Jain, Advocate was admitted to Indraprastha Apollo Hospital on 6th March, 2009 at 1.00 p.m. and passed away on 1st April, 2009 due to gross, grave and reckless criminal negligence of the hospital and its doctors; the patient was admitted for a non-cardiac surgery of incision and drainage of perianal abscess – despite being a known cardiac patient, all his vital cardiac medicines and antiplatelet drugs were completely discontinued for continuous three weeks by the regular Cardiologist who also stopped visiting/evaluating the patient and in consequence whereof the patient succumbed to Myocardial Infraction;

(iii) that the petitioner filed complaint before the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission on 19th March, 2010 against the hospital and its doctors and on 19th October, 2010 also filed a complaint for disciplinary action for professional misconduct and medical negligence against the hospital and its doctors under Section 10(f) of the DMC Act before the respondent DMC, being Complaint No.780/2010;

(iv) that the petitioner also filed a complaint before SHO, PS Sarita Vihar on 12th October, 2010 for registration of FIR under Section 304A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and for forging and tampering of the medical record and being aggrieved by the inaction of the Police, filed application under Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) along with complaint before the Metropolitan Magistrate (MM), Saket seeking registration of an FIR; aggrieved from one of the orders of the MM in the said complaint case, the petitioner preferred Crl. M.C. No.2504/2011 before this Court and this Court vide order dated 5th August, 2011 directed the respondent DMC to communicate its opinion on the complaint preferred by the petitioner in a sealed cover to the Court;

(v) that one of the documents produced by the respondent DMC in the aforesaid Crl. M.C. No.2504/2011 related to the meeting held by the respondent DMC on 27th April, 2010 where in the criteria for appointment of a Medical Specialist to be an expert member of the Disciplinary Committee was laid down as follows:-

“(i) He should be registered with Delhi Medical Council.

(ii) He should be a holder of post graduate qualification with minimum of 15 years of experience after obtaining the post graduate qualification.

(iii) He should be of high integrity and good standing.

(iv) He should have no conflict of interest.”

(vi) that the respondent DMC, on 15th February, 2012 communicated the decision of its Disciplinary Committee to this Court in Crl. M.C. No.2504/2011 in a sealed envelope and on perusal whereof this Court vide order dated 2nd July, 2012 dismissed Crl. M.C. No.2504/2011 preferred by the petitioner with clarification that the respondent DMC may proceed further qua its decision communicated to this Court;

(vii) the respondent DMC vide order dated 18th July, 2012 confirmed the order dated 17th November, 2011 of its Disciplinary Committee;

(viii) the petitioner on checking the website of the respon