5 Minutes

THE GENERAL BODY OF A.P. MEDICAL COUNCIL

MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE GENERAL BODY OF A.P. MEDICAL COUNCIL HELD AT 2-00 P.M. ON 10-01-2008 IN DR.CHIGURUPATI

NAGESWARA RAO COUNCIL HALL.

The following members are present:- 1. Dr.Vallabhaneni Ramprasad. Chairman 2. Dr.G.Balamaddaiah. Vice-Chairman 3. Dr.Balbeer Singh Yadav. Member 4. Dr.K.Ramesh Reddy. Member 5. Dr.P.Vijayachander Reddy. Member 6. Dr.Nagalla Kishore. Member 7. Dr.E.Ravinder Reddy. Member 8. Dr.A.V.Krishnam Raju. Member 9. Dr.Cipai Subrahmanyam. Member 10. Dr.K.L.Sampath Kumar. Member 11. Dr.Surapureddy Sreenivasa Reddy. Member 12. Dr.Raj Siddarth. Member 13. Dr.Ramesh Chandra, DH Ex-officio Member 14. Dr.A.Y.Chary, DME Ex-officio Member 15. Dr.C.Padmavathi Member The Director Institute of Preventive Medicine ex-officio member has neither attended the meeting nor taken leave of absence.

The General Body meeting was presided over by Dr.V.Ram Prasad, Chairman. As per the directions of the Chairman, the Secretary/Registrar initiated the discussions. Copies of the proceedings of the General Body dated 17-07-2007, the minutes of the Executive Committee dated 17-07-2007, 28-08-2007, 30-10-2007 and 04-12-2007 are made available in advance to all the Members of the Council.

The General Body after detailed discussion and after taking into account of the material placed before it, has passed the following resolutions unanimously.

1. TO CONFIRM MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING OF THE GENERAL BODY HELD ON 17-07-2007.

Resolved that the minutes of the meeting of the General Body held on 17-07-2007be confirmed.

2. TO CONFIRM THE MINUTES OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE HELD ON 17-07-2007, 28-08-2007, 30-10-2007 AND 04-12-2007

Resolved that the minutes of the meetings of the Executive Committee held on

17-07-2007, 28-08-2007, 30-10-2007 and 04-12-2007 be confirmed.

3. TO CONSIDER THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE ETHICAL & MAL PRACTICES COMMITTEE & RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AND TAKE NECESSARY DECISIONS ON VARIOUS CASES.

Resolved that both the doctors, Dr.Uday Naik and Dr.M.Nagaraj be “Censured for their for the lapses, they have committed in not maintaining proper records”

Resolved that the name of Dr.M.Srinivasa Rao be erased from Medical Register for a period 1 (one) Year as per the provisions of Section-17(2) of Andhra Pradesh Medical Practitioners Registration Act, 1968.

Resolved that the name of Dr.V.S.R.Prasad be erased from Medical Register for a period 1 (one) Year as per the provisions of Section-17(2) of Andhra Pradesh Medical Practitioners Registration Act, 1968.

Resolved that Dr.S.Satyanarayana Reddy be discharged from the allegations made against him.

Also resolved that Dr.M.Lakshmi Ratna be discharged from the allegations made against her.

.4.TO ELECT VICE CHAIRMAN U/S 5(2) OF APMP REG. ACT 1968

Dr.Balbeer Singh Yadav declared elected as Vice Chairman unanimously

5. TO ELECT THREE MEMBERS TO THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE UNDER SECTION 11 (1) OF APMP REG. ACT 1968

Dr.G.Balamaddaiah, Dr.K.Ramesh Reddy and Dr.K.L.Sampath Kumar have been declared elected as members of the Executive Committee, APMC.

6. TO CONSIDER CONSTITUTION OF VARIOUS COMMITTEES AS PROVIDED UNDER SECTION 12(1) & 12 (2) OF THE APMP REG. ACT 1968.

The following Committee have been constituted with Members Elected and Nominated members. 1 Ethical and Mal Practices Committee

Dr.P.Vijaychander Reddy :Chairman Dr.N.Kishore :Member Dr.E.Ravinder Reddy :Member

Nominated by the Council (i) Dr.R.Jaya Chandra Reddy :Member (ii) Dr.Gutta Suresh :Member

(iii) Dr.N.Raghava Rao :Member2. Finance Committee Dr.K.Ramesh Reddy :Chairman Dr. G.Balamaddaiah :Member Dr.N.Kishore :MemberNominated by the Council (i)Dr.Ch.Srinivasa Raju :Member (ii)Dr.G.Ashok :Member (iii)Bhoomgari Mohan Rao :Member

3. Administrative Committee Dr. Dr.K.L.Sampath Kumar :Chairman Dr.N.Kishore :Member Dr.E.Ravinder Reddy :Member

Nominated by the Council (i) Dr.Tagore :Member (ii) Dr.T.Narasinga Reddy :Member (iii) Dr.B.Ramesh Kumar :Member

4. Building Committee Dr.C.Padmavathi :Chairperson Dr.K.Ramesh Reddy :Member Dr.G.Balamaddiah :Member

Nominated by the Council

(i) Dr.L.V.Raghava Rao :Member (ii) Dr.U.Vijender Reddy :Member (iii) Dr.Nippuleti Vasudev :Member

5. CME Committee

Dr.S.Srinivasa Reddy :Chairman Dr.Ramesh Chandra (DH) :Member Dr.K.L.Sampath Kumar :Member

Nominated by the Council (i)Dr. P.Ramesh :Member (ii)Dr.P.Samba Siva Rao :Member (iii)Dr.J.Ravi Kumar :Member

6. Medical Education, Medical Colleges & Allied Institutions Committee Dr.Cipai Subramanyam :Chairman Dr. (Mrs.) Sucharitha Murthy Director, Institute of Pre. Medicine:Member Dr.K.Ramesh Reddy :Member

Nominated by the Council

(i)Dr.Janaki (of Kurnool) :Member (ii) Dr.A.Y.Chary :Member (iii) Dr.Raju (APJUDA) :Member

7. Public Relations Committee Dr. Raj Siddharth :Chairman Dr.C.Padmavathi :Member Dr.S.Srinivasa Reddy :Member

- 13 -

Nominated by the Council (i)Dr.G.S.Murthy :Member (ii)Dr.Sai Prasad :Member (iii) Dr.Dilip P. Bhanu Shali :Member

8. Legal and Anti quackery Committee Dr.E.Ravinder Reddy :Chairman Dr.Cipai Subramanyam :Member Dr.Raj Siddharth :Member

Nominated by the Council (i) Dr.Venugopal : Member (ii) Dr.V.S.Prasad : Member (iii)Dr.Maheswar Reddy (APJUDA) : Member

8.TO CONSIDER ANY OTHER ITEM WITH THE PERMISSION OF THE CHAIR.(1)TO CONSIDER AMENDING THE A.P.MEDICAL COUNCIL(CONDUCT OF) ELECTION RULES,1978 TO CONDUCT ELECTIONS TO THE COUNCIL ON THE LINES OF BAR COUNCIL OF THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH ELECTIONS.

Resolved that A.P.MEDICAL COUNCIL (CONDUCT OF ELECTION) RULES, 1978 be amended on the lines of on the lines of Bar Council of the State of Andhra Pradesh elections. Also resolved that Draft APMC ELECTION (AMENDMENT) RULES be prepared in consultation with the Standing Counsel and the same may be placed before the Executive Committee/General Body in March, 2008 for further consideration and approval.

(2) TO CONSIDER CONVENING PRESS CONFERENCE TO HIGH LIGHT THE ETHICAL ASPECTS OF ADVERTISEMENTS APPEARING IN DAILIES/WEEKLIES/MONTHLIES AND ALSO IN THE ELECTRONIC MEDIA.

Resolved that a Press Conference be convened to “highlight the Ethical aspects of advertisements appearing in Print and Visual media”. Also resolved that a message should go to all doctors through the Press & Visual media so that the doctors shall desist from giving advertisements and keep large size hoardings which are unethical as per the IMC Regulations, 2002

The meeting concluded with Vote of thanks to the Chair.

Sd/-Sd/- CHAIRMAN

SECRETARY APMC

MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE GENERAL BODY OF A.P. MEDICAL COUNCIL HELD AT 3-00 P.M. ON 30-03-2008 IN DR.CHIGURUPATI

NAGESWARA RAO COUNCIL HALL.

The following members are present:-

1. Dr.Vallabhaneni Ramprasad. Chairman 2. Dr.Balbeer Singh Yadav. Vice-Chairman 3. Dr.G.Balamaddaiah. Member 4. Dr.K.Ramesh Reddy. Member 5. Dr.K.L.Sampath Kumar. Member 6. Dr.P.Vijaya Chander Reddy Member 7. Dr.Nagalla Kishore Member 8. Dr.E.Ravinder Reddy Member 9. Dr. Surapureddy Sreenivasa Reddy. Member 10. Dr.Raj Siddarth. Member 11. Dr.C.Padmavathi Member

The Chairman has granted leave of absence to Dr.A.V.Krishnam Raju and Dr.Cipai Subrahmanyam, Members who could not attend to the meeting.

The Director of Medical Education, the Director of Health and the Director Institute of Preventive Medicine ex-officio members have neither attended the meeting nor taken leave of absence.

The General Body after detailed discussion and after taking into account of the material placed before it, has passed the following resolutions unanimously.

1. TO CONFIRM MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING OF THE GENERAL BODY HELD ON 10-01-2008.

Resolved that the minutes of the meeting of the General Body held on 10.01.2008 be confirmed.

2. TO CONSIDER AND APPROVE THE REPORT OF THE CHAIRMAN, FINANCE COMMITTEE FOR THE YEAR 2008-09.

It is unanimously resolved to approve the Report of the Chairman, Finance Committee for the year 2008-09.

3. TO CONSIDER AND APPROVE THE BUDGET PROPOSALS FOR THE YEAR 2008-09.

It is unanimously resolved that the Budget Proposals for the year 2008-09 be approved.

4. TO CONSIDER REPORT OF THE ETHICAL & MAL-PRACTICES COMMITTEE DATED:14.03.2008.

It is unanimously resolved to approve the Interim Report of the Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee. It is also resolved that Dr.A.Venkateswara Reddy, Dermatologist be warned not to practice Homeopathic system of medicine and not to conduct classes in Homeopathy.

5. TO CONSIDER INSTITUTING A.P.MEDICAL COUNCIL GOLD MEDAL FROM MAY/JUNE, 2008 FOR BEST OUTGOING STUDENT OF EACH MEDICAL COLLEGE IN LIEU OF CASH WARD OF RS.10,000/-.

It is unanimously resolved that A.P.Medical Council Gold Medal be instituted and awarded to the best outgoing student in each Medical College in the State who secured highest marks in Final MBBS Examination, Part-I and Part-II put together. It is also resolved that the Gold Medal be awarded as per the modalities worked out by the Chairman, MCE Committee from May / June, 2008. Further, it is resolved that the Gold Medal be awarded in a function conducted in the College simultaneously when the Internees Ethics Awareness Programme are conducted where the member of the would be present.

6. TO CONSIDER GRANTING REGISTRATION OF POST GRADUATE QUALIFICATIONS IN THE CASES OF QUALIFICATIONS WHICH WERE RECOMMENDED BY P.G.COMMITTEE, MCI AND FORWARDED BY MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA TO CNETRAL GOVERNMENT FOR PUBLICATION IN GOVT. OF INDIA GAZETTEE.

It is unanimously resolved that Registration of Post Graduate Qualification be granted to those candidates, where the Post Graduate Committee of MCI recommended for recognition and the Medical Council of India has approved the same and forwarded to Government of India for publication in Government of India Gazettee.

7. TO CONSIDER WAIVER OF FEE FOR FOREIGN VISITING DOCTORS – VISITING SATHYA SAI INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, PRASHANTHI NILAYAM, PUTTAPARTI (AS IT IS CHARITY FOR A PHILANTRAFIC INSTITUTION)

It is resolved that there shall be no consideration for exemption of fee. It is also resolved that payment of Registration Fee of Rs.2,000/- or Rs.5,000/- shall be applicable to all foreign visiting doctors irrespective of the hospital in which they undertake the demonstration of their skill or similar work.

Sd/-Secretary Sd/-Chairman APMC APMC

ANDHRA PRADESH MEDIAL COUNCIL: HYDERABAD-500 095MINUTES OF MEETING OF THE GENERAL BODY TO BE HELD ON 16-12-2008 AT 11.30 AM IN Dr.CHIGURUPATI NAGESWARA RAO

COUNCIL’S HALL, HYDERABAD.

$$$$$

The General Body meeting of the APMC held on 16.12.2008. Dr.V.Ramprasad, Chairman,

A.P.Medical Council has presided over the meeting. The following are present:

1. Dr.V.Ram Prasad Chairman 2. Dr.Balbeer Singh Yadav Vice-Chairman 3. Dr.G.Balamaddaiah Member 4. Dr.K.L.Sampath Kumar Member 5. Dr.K.Ramesh Reddy Member 6. Dr.P.Vijaya Chander Reddy Member 7. Dr.Surapureddy Srinivasa

Reddy Member

8. Dr.E.Ravinder Reddy Member 9. Dr.Cipai Subramanyam Member

10. Dr.Nagalla Kishore Member 11. Dr.Raj Siddhartha Member 12. Sri.K.Satyanarana Murty Secretary

The Chairman has granted leave of absence to Dr.A.V.KRISHNAM RAJU,

Dr.C.PADMAVATHI members and Dr.K.N.Sudha Ramana, Director of Medical

Education, Dr.P.Ramesh Chandra, Director of Health & Dr.P.Sucharitha Murthy,

Director Institute of Preventive Medicine, Hyderabad Ex-Officio Members who

expressed their inability to attend the meeting.

The General Body meeting was presided over by Dr.V.Ram Prasad,

Chairman. As per the directions of the Chairman, the Secretary/Registrar

initiated the discussions. Copies of the proceedings of the General Body dated

30-03-2008, the Minutes of the Executive Committee meetings dated 2-5-

2008, 08-06-2008, 30-07-2008,20-09-2008,14-11-2008 and 16-12-2008, the

Minutes of Ethical & Mal Practices Committee meetings held on 26-06-2008,

29-07-2008,16-09-2008 & 26-10-2008, the decisions of the Administrative

Committee meeting held on 29-07-2008, the decisions of the Finance

Committee meeting held on 16-12-2008, Auditor’s Report for the year 2007-

08, Financial Statement of the Council as on 12-12-2008 are made available to

all the Members of the Council.

After detailed discussion and taking into consideration of the material placed

before it, the General Body has passed the following resolutions unanimously.

1. TO CONFIRM THE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING OF THE

GENERAL BODY HELD ON 30-03-2008.

Resolved that the Minutes of the meeting of the General Body held

on 30.03.2008 be confirmed.

2. TO CONFIRM THE MINUTES OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

MEETINGS

HELD ON 2-5-2008, 8-6-2008,30-07-2008,20-09-2008 AND 14-

11-2008

It is resolved that the minutes of the meetings of the Executive

Committee held on 02.05.2008, 08.06.2008, 30.07.2008, 20.09.2008,

14.11.2008 and 16.12.2008 be approved. It is also resolved that the

decision of the Executive Committee in appointing Mrs.L.Madhavi Latha

on contract basis on consolidated pay of Rs.6,000/- p.m. be approved.

3. TO CONSIDER THE ACTION TAKEN REPORT ON THE MINUTES OF

THE

PREVIOUS MEETING OF THE GENERAL BODY.

It is resolved that the action taken report on the minutes of the

previous meeting of the General Body be approve in toto.

4. TO CONSIDER THE OBSERVATIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE

ETHICAL & MAL-PRACTICES COMMITTEE IN THE MEETINGS HELD

ON

26-06-2008, 29-07-2008,16-09-2008 & 26-10-2008.

It is resolved that the observations/recommendations of the Ethical &

Mal-Practices Committee as amended / approved by the Executive Committee

be approved. It is resolved that the recommendations of the Ethical & Mal-

Practices Committee in Case.No.5/2006 i.e. the complaint made by Dr Ram

Mohan be approved. It is resolved that Dr.Manohar Reddy and Dr.M.Nagaraj

are not negligent in treating the patient Mrs.Hemadurg. It is further resolved

that Dr.Ram Mohan be directed not to display the Diploma, ‘D.Diab’ as it is an

un-recognised diploma.

It is also resolved that the observations/recommendations of the Ethical

& Mal Practices Committee in Case No.15/2007, i.e. the Complaint made by Sri

Madireddy Brahmananda Reddy against Dr.Y.V.Prabhakar and Dr.Amarnath

who had given treatment and that the treating doctors are not negligent as

they have followed the approved lines of treatment - be approved.

It is also resolved that the names of Dr.Roya Rozati and Dr.Salman

Saifuddin be removed from the Medical Register for a period of THREE

MONTHS from the date of issuing notice in this respect as per provisions of

Section 17(2) r/w Section 15(4) of A.P.Medical Practitioners Registration Act,

1968 for their lapses in treating the patient Mrs.Nikhat Fatima as observed by

Ethical & Mal Practices Committee. It is also resolved to direct both the

doctors to surrender their Permanent Registration Certificates forthwith.

It is also resolved that the observations/recommendations of Ethical &

Mal Practices Committee/Executive Committee be approved in of Case

No.17/2007, as the complaint made by Balgovind Gupta & Bal Govind Gupta

against Dr.Anil Kumar Jha as he is not negligent in treating the patient Balram

Gupta.


Mal Practices Committee be approved in case No.18/2007 and the Complaint

made by Smt.Valsa Padma against Dr.K.Shanti Kiran as there was no harm to

the patient and that the complainant has withdrawn her complaint.


Mal Practices Committee / Executive Committee be approved in Case

No.20/2007, i.e. the Complaint made by the Secretary General, SC Rights

Protection Society against Dr.Namburi Sunil Kumar as Dr.Namburi Sunil Kumar

has sincerely attended the patient, Master Bandi Sai Dora Babu and provided

medical aid in order to save the patient and after necessary resuscitation, the

patient was referred to a higher hospital with the help of the Anesthetist who

was available there. It is resolved that Dr.Namburi Sunil Kumar be advised to

maintain records properly.

It is also resolved that the opinion of the Experts Committee constituted

by the Superintendent, GGH, Guntur be taken into consideration, the expert

opinion of the experts committee of APMC together with the observations of

the Ethical & Mal Practices Committee as approved in Case No.21/2007, i.e.

the complaint received against Dr.K.Vijaya Kumari be approved. It is resolved

that Dr.K.Vijaya Kumari be advised to display her MBBS Qualification only and

remove the degree M.S.(Ophth.), suffixing to her name.

5. TO CONSIDER THE AUDITOR’S REPORT FOR THE YEAR 2007-08

AND

APPROVE THE SAME.

It is resolved that the Auditor’s Report for the Year 2007-08 be

approved. It is also resolved that the recommendations of the Finance

Committee as approved by the Executive Committee in this respect be

approved.

6. TO CONSIDER EXTENDING THE BENEFIT OF EPF TO THE

EMPLOYEES OFTHE COUNCIL IN LIEU OF THE EXISTING PPF

BENEFIT w.e.f.1-1-2009

It is resolved that the recommendation of the Administrative

Committee as approved by the Executive Committee be approved. It is

also resolved to extend the benefit of EPF to the employees of the

Council w.e.f.01.01.2009 @ 25% Pay and DA including the Employee’s

share of 12 ½ % of Pay & DA instead of the existing PPF benefit.

7. TO CONSIDER THE REPORTS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE.

It is resolved that the recommendation of the Administrative

Committee as approved by the Executive Committee in respect of

Promotion of Smt.D.Varalakshmi as Sr.Assistant w.e.f. 20.08.2008

subject to the condition that she should complete her graduation with in

a period of two years from the date of issuing orders to enable her to

get further increments as Sr.Assistant after two years of service – be

approved.

It is also resolved that the recommendation of the Administrative


appointment of Sri.G.Anil Kumar as Assistant w.e.f.01.08.2008 in regular scale

of Rs.4825-12-10825 with all usual allowances and special pay as may be

admissible under rules in the vacancy arose consequent on retirement of

Sri.Syed Yousuf Ali, Assistant – be approved.



appointment of Sri.V.Suresh as Office Subordinate (Attender) w.e.f.01.08.2008

in regular scale of Rs.3850-100-8600 with all usual allowances and special pay

if any as per rules. He shall work as driver to the Registrar as usual, in the

existing vacancy – be approved.


Committee as approved by the Executive Committee with regard to the

application of Sri.N.S.Murty, Admn. Officer to modify the earlier orders of the

Council on stoppage of three (3) increments with cumulative effect into that of

stoppage of three (3) increments without cumulative effect – be approved. It is

further resolved that consequent on punishment of stoppage of three (3)

increments without cumulative effect, the incumbent be released increments

after obtaining approval from the Chairman, Administrative Committee and

the Chairman, APMC.

8. TO CONSIDER THE REPORT OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE

It is resolved that the recommendation of the Finance Committee for

obtaining lower rates from three courier firms for sending Identity Cards and

other articles through Courier – be approved. It is further resolved that an

application be submitted to the Central Government for obtaining postal

exemption under the Certificate of Posting.

It is also resolved that the recommendation of the Finance Committee as

approved by the Executive Committee for payment of recurring expenditure

upto a limit of Rs.300/- per month to Sri.N.S.Murty, Admn. Officer

w.e.f.01.01.2009 – be approved.


approved by the Executive Committee to authorize the Chairman, APMC & the

Chairman, Finance Committee to take appropriate decision in fixing the

amount of initial professional fee payable to Advocate on Record, Hon’ble

Supreme Court depending upon the case.


approved by the Executive Committee with regard to the sanction of 2nd

installment of Interim Relief @ 7% to the Staff of APMC w.e.f. 01.01.2009 - be

approved.


approved by the Executive Committee with regard to payment of Ex-gratia for

the year 2008 to the Employees of APMC who have put in one year of service

during 2008 including sanctioned leave – be approved. It is further resolved

that the Ex-gratia be paid in the month of January, 2009.


approved by the Executive Committee to deposit an amount of Rs.1,49,325/-

in FDR in the name of the A.P.Medical Council and to pay the interest accrued

thereon to Sri Syed Yousuf Ali, Jr.Asst. (Retd) quarterly, in lieu of Provisional

Pension as available to Government employees in similar cases be approved.


approved by the Executive Committee with regard to converting the SB

accounts as Auto-sweep account for the amount over and above Rs.1 Lakh be

approved.


approved by the Executive Committee with regard to sanction of special

allowance of Rs.1,000/- p.m. to Sri K.Somasekhara Rao, PS w.e.f. 01-10-2008

in lieu of Interim Relief and DA sanctioned to other employees of the Council

– be approved.

It is resolved that other recommendations of Finance Committee as

approved by the Executive Committee – be approved.

1. TO CONSIDER ANY OTHER ITEM WITH THE PERMISSION OF THE

CHAIRMAN.

It is resolved that Laptops be provided to all the 13-elected and nominated

members of the Council in order to have electronic transmission of data /

information from the office of the Council and in order to retrieve huge data

available on MCI website etc. It is further resolved that Chairman, APMC &

Chairman, Finance Committee in consultation with Secretary/Registrar of the

Council be authorized to obtain quotations for the brands Dell/Sony and

purchase the 13 Laptops as early as possible and provide to the elected and

nominated members of the Council.

It is resolved that the recommendation of Executive Committee in directing

the Secretary of the Council to issue summons to Dr.V.Sriramulu to appear

before the Ethical & Mal practices Committee on 23-12-2008 in pursuance of

Judgment Order dated 04-07-2008 of III Sr. Civil Judge City Civil Court,

Secunderabad be approved.

It is also resolved to accept the recommendation of Executive Committee

for rejecting the application of Dr.Kontham Raja Gopal Rao for grant of

Permanent Registration.

It is also resolved to accept the recommendation of Executive Committee

to purchase Digital Camera of reputed brand for attaching to Desk Top Card

Printer and for use of the Council and the expenditure on this account be met

from the funds available in Punjab National Bank, Koti, Hyderabad.

The meeting concluded with the vote of thanks to the chair.

Sd/-Secretary Sd/-Chairman APMC APMC

ANDHRA PRADESH MEDIAL COUNCIL: HYDERABAD-500 095

MINUTES OF MEETING OF THE GENERAL BODY HELD ON 20-01-2009 AT 11.30 AM IN Dr.CHIGURUPATI NAGESWARA RAO COUNCIL’S HALL,

HYDERABAD.$$$$$

The General Body meeting of the APMC held on 20-01-2009. Dr.V.Ramprasad, Chairman,

A.P.Medical Council has presided over the meeting. The following are present:

1. Dr.V.Ram Prasad Chairman 2. Dr.Balbeer Singh Yadav Vice-Chairman 3. Dr.K.N.Sudha Ramana,

Director of Medical Education Ex-Officio Member

4. Dr.P.Ramesh Chandra, Director of Health

Ex-Officio Member

5. Dr.P.Sucharitha Murthy, Director, Instt. of Preventive Medicine

Ex-Officio Member

6. Dr.G.Balamaddaiah Member 7. Dr.K.L.Sampath Kumar Member 8. Dr.K.Ramesh Reddy Member 9. Dr.P.Vijaya Chander Reddy Member 10.

Dr.Surapureddy Srinivasa Reddy Member

11.

Dr.E.Ravinder Reddy Member

12.

Dr.Cipai Subramanyam Member

13.

Dr.Nagalla Kishore Member

14.

Dr.Raj Siddhartha Member

15.

Dr.C.Padmavathi Member

16.

Sri.K.Satyanarana Murty Secretary

The Chairman has granted leave of absence to Dr.A.V.KRISHNAM RAJU,

who has expressed his inability to attend the meeting.

The meeting of the General Body was presided over by Dr.V.Ram

Prasad, Chairman. As per the directions of the Chairman, the

Secretary/Registrar initiated the discussions. Copies of the proceedings of the

General Body dated 16-12-2008, the decisions of Executive Committee dated

20-01-2009, the Minutes of Ethical & Mal Practices Committee meetings held

on 23-12-2008 & 18-01-2009 are made available to all the members of the

Council.

After detailed discussion and taking into consideration of the material

placed before it, the General Body has passed the following resolutions

unanimously.

1. TO CONFIRM THE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING OF THE GENERAL BODY HELD ON 16-12-2008.

Resolved that the Minutes of the meeting of the General Body held on 16-12-2008 be confirmed.

2. TO CONFIRM THE MINUTES OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETINGS

HELD ON 16-12-2008 and 20-01-2009.

Resolved that the Minutes of the meetings of the Executive Committee held on 16-12-2008 and 20-01-2009 be confirmed.

3. TO CONSIDER THE ACTION TAKEN REPORT ON THE MINUTES OF

THE PREVIOUS MEETING OF THE GENERAL BODY.

It is resolved that the action taken report on the minutes of the

previous meeting of the General Body be approved in toto.

4. TO CONSIDER THE OBSERVATIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE

ETHICAL & MAL-PRACTICES COMMITTEE IN THE MEETINGS HELD

ON

23-12-2008, & 18-01-2009.

It is resolved that the observations/recommendations of the Ethical &

Mal-Practices Committee as approved by the Executive Committee be

approved.

(i) Case.No.13/2007 :- It is resolved that there is no negligence on the

part of treating doctors, Dr.K.Sunder Rao and Dr.K.Gopinath in

treating the patient Farnaz at KGH, Family Hospital, Hyderabad. It is

also resolved that the Station House Officer, PS, Malakpet be

informed accordingly in response to his

Letter.No.248/Crime/MKP/2007, dt:02.05.2007.

(ii) Case.No.09/2008:- It is resolved that the complaint made by Sri

M.Sivaramayya against Dr.Laxman Basani of DOLPHIN CHILDREN’S

HOSPITAL, Hyderabad be treated as “WITHDRAWN” in view of

withdrawal of complaint by the complainant and also in view of

affidavit filed by Sri C.V.S.N.Murthy, father of the child stating that

they were fully satisfied regarding medical and surgical management

of his son at DOLPHIN CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL, Hyderabad. It is also

resolved that further proceedings be dropped in the matter in terms

of Rule 4(1) (a) of APMC Rules, 1978.

(iii) Case.No.03/2008:- It is resolved that the complaint made by Sri

J.P.Singh against Dr.Subhash Kumar, Hyderabad be treated as

“WITHDRAWN” in view of non-filing of complaint in the form of an

affidavit as per rules. It is also resolved that further proceedings be

stopped in the matter in terms of Rule 4(1) (a) of APMC Rules, 1978.

(iv) Case.No.10/2006:- It is resolved that the complaint made by Sri I

Gopinath against Dr.Desai Tippa Reddy and Dr.K.Sailaja Desai be

treated “as withdrawn” in view of non response from the complainant

in furnishing the required information and missing pages of the

complaint. It is also resolved that further proceedings be stopped in

the matter in terms of Rule 4(1) (a) of APMC Rules, 1978.

(v) Case.No.01/2008:- It is resolved that there is no negligence on the

part of treating doctors, Dr.Malineni Srinivasa Rao and Dr.S.Vijaya

Raghava Rao in treating the patient Sri Kakunuri Brahmaiah. It is also

resolved that Dr.Malineni Srinivasa Rao be directed to delete the un-

recognized diploma, i.e. “D.Diab” after his name. It is further resolved

that Dr.Malineni Srinivasa Rao be warned not to resort to un-ethical

acts such as issuing various advertisements in news papers.

(vi) Case.No.14/2008:- It is resolved that there is no negligence on the

part of respondent, Dr.P.Padmaja in treating the patient Manda

Swarna Latha, wife of the complainant, Manda Venkateswarlu.

(vii) Case.No.15/2008:- It is resolved that there is no negligence or un-

ethical act committed by doctors of Yashoda Hospital, Hyderabad in

supplying necessary documents to the complainant.

(viii) Case.No.23/2008:- It is resolved that the action taken by E&MPC in

granting time upto 31.01.2009 for obtaining stay on the proceedings

dt:04.07.2008 of the Hon’ble III Senior Judge, CCC, Secunderabad.

(ix) Case.No.06/2008:- It is resolved that there is no negligence on the

part of Dr. L.Vidya Sagar Reddy in treating the patient. It is also

resolved that Dr.L.Vidya Sagar Reddy be advised not to issue

Certificates for insurance claims or other purposes as per the request

of the patients / their attendants as the same will amount to un-

ethical act and attracts disciplinary action by the Council.

(x) Case.No.19/2007:- It is resolved that there is no negligence on the

part of respondent doctors, Dr.Koneru Sridhar, Dr.K.Nanda Kumar and

Dr.G.Lakshmi Prasad in treating the patient Arja Vamsi Sriram. It is

further resolved that Dr.Nanda Kumar be advised for maintaining the

hospital as per present day standards. It is further resolved that

Dr.G.Lakshmi Prasad be informed that the surgeon is responsible to

the extent of post operative care.

(xi) Case.No.04/2008:- It is resolved that there is no negligence on the

part of respondent doctors, P.V.Satyapal Reddy, consultant

Paediatrician and Dr.K.Krishna Reddy, Medical Superintendent,

Medicare Hospital in treating the son of the complainant.

(xii) Case.No.05/2008:- It is resolved that there is no negligence on the

part of

respondent Dr.D.Maheshwar in treating the patient Sri.K.Venkata

Chary,

father of the complainant at Life Line Hospital, Warangal /

Hanamkonda.

(xiii) It is also resolved that the action taken by Ethical & Mal-Practices

Committee in respect of (a) Case No.02/2008, (b) Case No.07/2008,

(c) Case No.08/2008 (d) Case No.10/2008 (e) Case No.09/2006, (f)

Case No.17/2008, (g) Case No.22/2007 and (h) Case No.23/2007 be

ratified.

(xiv) It is further resolved that references be made on complaints to the

experts even from out side Hyderabad / Secunderabad, both in

Government Service and Private Practice for their expert opinion in

cases where the Ethical Committee desires to obtain expert opinion.

(xv) It is resolved that the recommendation of Ethical & Mal-Practices

Committee for fixing fee for filing complaints in order to prevent

frivolous complaints. It is further resolved that a fee of Rs.3000/- be

fixed for filing complaints against medical practitioners. It is also

resolved that the persons below the poverty line be given 50% of

concession in the fee fixed. It is also resolved that the

Secretary/Registrar be directed to prepare draft guidelines taking into

consideration of the guidelines already issued by Medical Council of

India for placing the same in the next meeting of the Executive

Committee. It is also resolved that the Executive Committee shall

examine the and approve the same with amendments, if any and place

the same before the General Body for its ratification.

5. TO ELECT CHAIRMAN AS PER SECTION 5(1) OF APMP REG. ACT,

1968.

Resolved that Dr.Balbeer Singh Yadav be elected as Chairman, APMC

under Section 5(1) of APMP REG. ACT, 1968 as proposed by Dr.P.Vijaychander

Reddy and seconded by Dr.N.Kishore.

6. TO ELECT VICE- CHAIRMAN AS PER SECTION 5(2) OF APMP REG.

ACT,

1968

Resolved that Dr.K.L.Sampath Kumar be elected as Vice-Chairman under

Section 5(2) of APMP Reg. Act, 1968 as proposed by Dr.G.Balamaddaiah and

seconded by Dr.N.Kishore.

7. TO ELECT THREE MEMBERS OF EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AS PER

SECTION

11(1) OF APMP REG.ACT, 1968.

Resolved that Dr.Cipai Subramanyam, Dr.E.Ravinder Reddy and

Dr.N.Kishore be elected as Members of Executive Committee as proposed by

Dr.G.Balamaddaiah and seconded by Dr.P.Vijay Chander Reddy.

8.TO ELECT CHAIRMEN AND MEMBERS OF OTHER COMMITTEES AS PER SECTION 12(1) AND SECTION 12(2) OF A.P.M.P.REG. ACT, 1968.

It is resolved that the Chairmen and Members of the following Special

Committees be elected as per Section 12(1) of the Act. It is also resolved

that members be nominated to each of the following Committees as per

Section 12(2) of the Act.

ETHICAL AND MAL PRACTICE CHAIRMAN : DR.P.VIJAYA CHANDER REDDY

DR.N.KISHORE DR.C.SUBRAMANAYAM DR.G.BALAMADDAIAH

NOMINATED MEMBERSDR.A.KESANNADR.N.VASUDEVDR.G.S.MURTYDR.J.RAVI KUMAR

ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE:CHAIRMAN DR.S.SRINIVASA REDDY

DR.G.BALAMADDAIAHDR.C.PADMAVATHI

DR.E.RAVINDER REDDY

NOMINATED MEMBERSDR.N.APPA RAODR.R.JAYACHANDRA REDDYDR.M.NARSING RAODR.S.SARADA

FINANCE COMMITTEE: CHAIRMAN : DR.VALLABHANENI .RAMPRASAD

DR.P.SUCHARITHA MURTYDR.E.RAVINDER REDDYDR.S.SRINIVASA REDDY

NOMINATED MEMBERSDR.P.SAMBASIVA RAODR.E.SAI PRASADDR.K.SIVARAMA KRISHNA (Vijayawada) DR.G.ASHOK

BUILDING COMMITTEECHAIRMAN : DR.C.PADMAVATHI

DR.K.RAMESH REDDYDR.D.RAMESH CHANDRA DR.B.RAJ SIDDHARTH

NOMINATED MEMBERSDR.E.VIJAYENDRA REDDYDR.S.JAGAN MOHAN RAODR.R.M.SABOODR.K.KALADHAR

PUBLIC RELATIONSCHAIRMAN : DR.C.SUBRAMANYAM

DR.SUCHARITHA MURTHYDR.C.PADMAVATHI

DR.P.VIJAYACHANDER REDDYNOMINATED MEMBERS

DR.C.S.PRASADA RAO (Vijayawada)DR.CH.SRINIVASA RAJUDR.NALLURI RAGHAVA RAODR.G.BHAVANI

LEGAL AND ANTI QUACKERYCHAIRMAN : DR.B.RAJ SIDDHARTH

DR.D.RAMESH CHANDRA DR.K.RAMESH REDDYDR.N.KISHORE

NOMINATED MEMBERSDR.K.SIVARAMAKRISHNA RAODR.V.S.PRASAD DR.BHOOMIGARI MOHAN RAODR.SHIVALINGAM

MEDICAL EDUCATION AND MEDICAL COLLEGES & ALLIED INSTITUTIONS COMMITTEE

CHARIMAN : DR.K.RAMESH REDDYDR.K.N.SUDHA RAMANADR.A.V.KRISHNAM RAJUDR.N.KISHORE

NOMINATED MEMBERSDR.V.LAKSHMAN RAODR.V.JANAKIDR.PHARNI KUMAR

DR.T.NARASINGA REDDY

CME COMMITTEECHAIRMAN : DR.G.BALAMADDAIAH

DR.K.N.SUDHA RAMANADR.B.RAJ SIDDHARTHDR.S.SRINIVAS REDDY

NOMINATED MEMBERSDR.L.V.RAGHAVA RAODR.A.SRIKANTH REDDYDR.B.NANDARAJ SINGHDR.B.RAMESH KUMAR


CHAIRMAN

(i) It is resolved that Dr.J.Sai Kavitha be granted Permanent

Registration on payment of Rs.1500/- being the difference

of fee and Rs.5000/- being late fee and on submission of an

affidavit duly attested by a notary public to the effect that

she is in U.S.A.

(ii) It is resolved that Dr.Mannepalli Sreenivasa Rao be

granted fresh registration under Section 17(4) of the Act

on submission of an affidavit to the effect that he will not

repeat un-ethical acts which will attract disciplinary action

by the Council.

(iii) It is resolved that Dr.Kontham Raja Gopal Rao be granted

Permanent Registration “on payment of late fee of

Rs.5000/- , a fee of Rs.1000/- towards revalidation of

Temporary Registration and on fulfillment of other

conditions as are required for condonation of delay period

of more than One Year”.

(iv) It is resolved that Sri Syed Yousuf Ali, Jr.Asst. (Retd.) be

paid Ex-gratia pro-rata for the period of 7 months in the

year 2008.

The meeting concluded with vote of thanks to the

Chairmen.

Sd/-SECRETARY Sd/-CHAIRMAN APMC APMC

Sd/-CHAIRMAN ELECTED APMC

ANDHRA PRADESH MEDIAL COUNCIL :: HYDERABAD-500 095MINUTES OF MEETING OF THE GENERAL BODY HELD ON 31-03-2009

AT 11.30 AM IN Dr.CHIGURUPATI NAGESWARA RAO COUNCIL’S HALL, HYDERABAD

$$$$$

The General Body meeting of the APMC held on 31.03.2009. Dr.Balbeer Singh Yadav,

Chairman, A.P.Medical Council has presided over the meeting. The following are present:

1. Dr.Balbeer Singh Yadav Chairman2. Dr.K.L.Sampath Kumar Vice-Chairman3. Dr.V.Ram Prasad Member4. Dr.K.N.Sudha Ramana,


5. Dr.P.Ramesh Chandra, Director of Health

Ex-Officio Member

6. Dr.P.Sucharitha Murthy, Director, Instt. of Preventive Medicine

Ex-Officio Member

7. Dr.G.Balamaddaiah Member8. Dr.Nagalla Kishore Member9. Dr.K.Ramesh Reddy Member

10. Dr.P.Vijaya Chander Reddy Member11. Dr.Surapureddy Srinivasa Reddy Member12. Dr.C.Padmavathi Member13. Sri.K.Satyanarana Murty Secretary

The Chairman has granted leave of absence to Dr.A.V.Krishnam Raju, Dr.Raj

Sidharth, Dr.Cipai Subrahmanyam and Dr.E.Ravinder Reddy who have expressed their

inability to attend the meeting.

The meeting of the General Body was presided over by Dr.Balbeer Singh Yadav,

Chairman. The Chairman welcomed the members of GB and directed the Secretary to

take up agenda Items. As per the directions of the Chairman, the Secretary/Registrar

initiated the discussions. Copies of the proceedings of the General Body dated:20-01-

2009, and the decisions of Finance Committee dated:31.03.2009 and the decisions of

Executive Committee dated:31-03-2009, are made available to all the members of the

Council.

After detailed discussion and taking into consideration of the material placed before it,

the General Body has passed the following resolutions unanimously.


Resolved that the Minutes of the meeting of the General Body held on

20-01-2009 be confirmed. It is also resolved that the action taken report on the

minutes of the previous meeting of the General Body be approved.

2. TO CONSIDER THE REPORT OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE DATED 31-03-2009.

Resolved that the decisions of the Finance Committee as approved by the

Executive Committee in its meeting held on 31-03-2009 relating to revised

estimates for the year 2008-09 and Budget Estimates for the year 2009-10 be

approved. Also resolved that the action taken in depositing the sum of Rs.40.00

Lakhs in Bank of Baroda, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad be ratified. It is also resolved

that an agreement be entered with Bank of Baroda, Banjara Hills for sanction of

House Building Advances, Personal Loans etc to the employees of the Council as

per the terms and conditions of the Loanee Bank. It is also resolved that a Special

Allowance of Rs.600/- pm to Sri N.Satyanarayana Murty, A.O. be sanctioned for

attending the work relating to attending to all court cases, both Hon’ble High Court

and Supreme Court and in Lower Courts of general nature. It is also resolved that

Audio Table Conference System with Seven (7) mikes, Board with mike control

system etc. be purchased at an estimated cost of Rs.1,43,100/-. It is also resolved

that Seventeen (17) Laptop Pieces of branded companies be purchased for giving

to the Elected, Nominated & Ex-Officio Members of the Council and Secretary,

A.P.Medical Council in the month of April, 2009. It is further resolved that One (1)

branded Computer System along with Printer cum Scanner be purchased in the

month of April, 2009 for use by G.Anil Kumar, Jr. Asst., O/o. APMC.

3. TO APPROVE THE DECISSION OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE DATED:31.03.2009.

It is resolved that the decisions of the Executive Committee be approved except in the case of Registration of M.D. (Venereology) as Additional Qualification.

(i) RATIFY THE ACTION TAKEN TO PUT SOME AMOUTN IN FD’S IN THE BANK OFFERED HIGHER INTEREST

It is also resolved that the action taken in depositing the sum of Rs.40.00 Lakhs in Bank of Baroda, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad be ratified.

(ii) TO CONSIDER ENTERING INTO AGREEMENT WITH BANK OF BARODA BANJARA HILLS BRANCH FOR SANCTION OF HOUSE BUILDING ADVANCE etc. TO THE EMPLOYEES OF THE COUNCIL

It is also resolved that an agreement be entered with Bank of Baroda, Banjara Hills for sanction of House Building Advances, Personal Loans etc to the employees of the Council as per the terms and conditions of the Loanee Bank.

(iii) TO CONSIDER SANCTION OF SPEICAL ALLOWANCE TO A.O. IN VIEW OF HEAVY WORK TURNED OUT BY HIM

It is also resolved that a Special Allowance of Rs.600/- pm to Sri.N.Satyanarayana Murty, A.O. be sanctioned for attending the Special duties relating to all court cases and this shall be reviewed after one year depending upon performance.

(iv) PURCHASE AUDIO CONFERENCE SYSTEM

It is also resolved that Audio Table Conference System with Seven (7) mikes, Board with mike control system etc. be purchased at an estimated cost of Rs.1,43,100/-.

(v) TO PURCHASE SEVENTEEN (17) LAPTOP PIECES FOR GIVING TO ALL THE MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL AND THE REGISTRAR

It is also resolved that Seventeen (17) Laptop Pieces of branded companies such as Dell-Portable or Sony Voya 15” be purchased for giving to the Elected, Nominated & Ex-Officio Members of the Council and the Secretary of the Council in the month of April, 2009.

(vi) TO PURCHASE COMPUTER SYSTEM

It is further resolved that One (1) branded Computer System along with Printer cum Scanner be purchased in the month of April, 2009 for use by G.Anil Kumar, Jr. Asst., O/o. APMC.

(vii) REGISTRATION OF ADDITIONAL QUALIFICATION OF M.D. (VENEREOLOGY)

It is resolved that the registration of M.D. (Venereology) granted to some candidates be kept in abeyance. It is further resolved that the candidates be directed to surrender their certificates of registration of additional qualification. It is also resolved that the candidates be directed not to use the said Certificates of Registration of Additional Qualification for any purpose. It is also resolved to recommend to Medical Council of India for grant of recognition to MD (Venereology) qualification.

(viii) REQUEST TO CONSIDER TO ISSUE HEALTH CARDS BY THE DME FOR THE STAFF OF APMC

It is resolved that the Director of Medical Education/Director of Health be addressed to consider to issue Health Cards to the staff of APMC on par with the Government employees.

(ix) TO CONSIDER INVITING EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL TO THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

It is resolved that the clarification given by the Standing Counsel that the Chairman and the Vice-Chairman of the APMC shall be the Ex-Officio Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Executive Committee be approved. It is resolved that the Ex-officio appeared in Section 11(1) of A.P. Medical Practitioners Registration Act, 1968 shall refer to Ex-officio Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Executive Committee. It is also resolved that the Government may be addressed for a clarification in this regard.

(x) IMPLEMENTATION OF THE GUIDELINES FRAMED BY THE MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA TO CURB THE MENANCE OF RAGGING IN MEDICAL COLLEGES.

It is resolved that the guidelines issued by the Medical Council of India in its letter dt:21.02.2009 to prevent ragging in Medical Colleges be noted.

(xi) TO PERUSE THE DIRECTION GIVEN BY HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRAPRADESH IN WP NO.1711 OF 2009 FILED BY MADDASANI VENKATESWARA RAO AND ANOTHER.

It is resolved that the matter be pursued with Standing Counsel of APMC. It is also resolved that the final order of the Division Bench of Hon’ble High Court be awaited.

(xii) TO CONSIDER THE APPLICATION OF DR.KHADIR ALI KHAN FOR GRANTOF PERMANENT REGISTRATION.

It is resolved to grant Permanent Registration to Dr.Khadir Ali Khan on payment of Rs.1,000/- as penalty and also that he should be warned to be more careful in future.

4. TO CONSIDER THE BUDGET PROPOSALS FOR THE YEAR 2009-10.

It is resolved that the revised estimates of expenditure of Rs.50,73,000/- for the year

2008-09 be approved. Further resolved that the Budget proposals for an expenditure of

Rs.64,26,000/- for the year 2009-10 be approved.

5. TO CONSIDER ANY OTHER ITEM WITH THE PERMISSION OF THE CHAIRMAN.

(i) To consider to Elect Chairman, Administrative Committee and Three other Members.

It is resolved that the item be taken up for consideration in the next meeting of the General Body.

(ii) To consider nomination of Two Members for each of the Special Committees.

It is also resolved that members be nominated to each of the following Committees as per Section 12(2) of the Act.

ETHICAL AND MAL-PRACTICES COMMITTEE FOR THE YEAR 20091. DR.A.KESANNA

2. DR.N.VASUDEV

FINANCE COMMITTEE FOR THE YEAR 20091. DR.P.SAMBASIVA RAO2. DR.E.SAI PRASAD

ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE- FOR THE YEAR 2009

1. DR.N.APPA RAO 2. DR.R.JAYACHANDRA REDDY

BUILDING COMMITTEE FOR THE YEAR 2009

1. DR.E.VIJAYENDRA REDDY 2. DR.K.KALADHAR

PUBLIC RELATIONS - FOR THE YEAR 2009

1. DR.C.S.R.PRASADA RAO 2. DR.CH.SRINIVASA RAJU

LEGAL AND ANTI QUACKERY – FOR THE YEAR 2009

1. DR.M.SHIVALINGAM 2. DR.V.S.PRASAD

MEDICAL EDUCATION AND MEDICAL COLLEGES & ALLIED INSTITUTIONS COMMITTEE - FOR THE YEAR 2009

1. DR.T.NARASINGA REDDY 2. DR.V.LAKSHMAN RAO

CME COMMITTEE – FOR THE YEAR 2009

1. DR.L.V.RAGHAVA RAO2. DR.A.SRIKANTH REDDY

(iii) To Consider to invite two members to the Special Committees:

It is resolved that the proposal be dropped as there is no provision in the Act to invite

two members to the Special Committees.

The meeting is concluded with vote of thanks to the Chair.

Sd/-SECRETARY Sd/-CHAIRMAN APMC APMC

THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

ANDHRA PRADESH MEDICAL COUNCIL::HYDERABAD

MINUTES OF MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING HELD ON 20.05.2009

AT 11.00 A.M. IN Dr.CHIGURUPATI NAGESWARA RAO COUNCIL’S HALL, HYDERABAD

The Executive Committee meeting of the APMC held on 20.05.2009. Dr.Balbeer Singh Yadav, Chairman, A.P.Medical Council has presided over the meeting. The following are present:

1. Dr.Balbeer Singh Yadav Chairman2. Dr.K.L.Sampath Kumar Vice-Chairman3. Dr.Nagalla Kishore Member4. Dr.E.Ravinder Reddy Member 4. Sri K.Satyanarayna Murty Secretary

The Chairman has granted leave of absence to Dr.Cipai Subrahmanyam who has expressed his inability to attend the meeting.

The meeting of the Executive Committee was presided over by Dr.Balbeer Singh Yadav, Chairman. The Chairman welcomed the members of Executive Committee and directed the Secretary to take up agenda Items. As per the directions of the Chairman, the Secretary / Registrar initiated the discussions. Copies of the Minutes of the Executive Committee dated: 31-03-2009, and the Minutes of Ethical & Mal Practices Committee dated:15-02-2009 and 30-04-2009 have been made available to all the members of the Executive Committee.

The Executive Committee has first considered the decisions of previous meeting of the Executive Committee held on 31-03-2009 and the action taken report on the previous minutes. The members have gone through the notes provided under this item together with information furnished with regard to the registrations done during 01-04-2009 -19-05-2009.

After detailed discussion and taking into consideration of the submission made by the Secretary in this respect, it is decided to confirm the minutes of the previous meeting of the Executive Committee held on 31.03.2009.

After detailed discussion and taking into consideration of the material placed before it, the Executive Committee passed the following resolutions unanimously.

1. TO CONFIRM THE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE HELD ON 31-03-2009.

The Minutes of the previous meeting of the Executive Committee

held on 31-03-2009 be confirmed.

2 TO CONSIDER THE REPORTS OF THE ETHICAL & MAL-PRACTICES COMMITTEE DATED 15-02-2009 AND 30-04-2009.

It is resolved that the Report of the Ethical & Mal Practices

Committee

dated 15-02-2009 and 30.04.2009 be approved.

(A) (i) It is resolved that the observation/recommendation of Ethical & Mal

Practices

Committee in case No.23/2007,that ‘the allegations made by the

complainant, Sri B.Venkateswar Reddy are not proved against

Dr.G.Satyanarayana, Dr.B.Ravi Shankar, Dr.N.Eshwar Chandra. The said

recommendation be approved. The observation of the E & MPC that

there was no role of Dr.G.Laxmana Sastry, Dr.S.Radha and Dr.M.Srinivas

as they were participants in the tumour board meeting held on 01-07-

2003 also be approved.

(ii) It is resolved that the observation/recommendation of Ethical & Mal

Practices Committee In Case No.09/2006 that ‘there is no negligence on

the part of Dr.C.Narasimhan, Cardiologist in treating the patient, Ms.

Swathi at Care Hospital,Hyd. be approved.

(iii) It is resolved that the Statements made by parties concerned in

Case.No.07/2008,

Case No.22/2007 and Case No.8/2008 be noted.

(iv) It is resolved that the recommendation of the Ethical & Mal Practices

Committee in

Case No.23/2008 to stop further proceedings in the matter against

Dr.V.Sree Ramulu upto 12-06-2009 in view of the Interim Stay granted

by Hon’ble High Court be approved.

(v) It is resolved that the decision of Ethical & Mal Practices Committee to

issue Summons to the parties concerned in Case No.22/2007,Case

No.12/2008, Case No.13/2008 and Case No.19/2008 be approved.

(vi) It is also resolved that the decision of Ethical & Mal Practices Committee

to take for consideration of other cases in the next meeting be approved.

3. TO CONSIDER THE DECISION OF THE GOVT. ON THE APPEAL PETITION FILED

BY Dr.ROYA ROZATI AND Dr.SALMAN SAIFUDDIN.

It is resolved to record the stay granted by the Appellate

Authority - the Government of Andhra Pradesh on the appeal petition filed

by Dr.Roya Rozati and Dr.Salman Saifuddin. It is also resolved that final

decision in the matter be awaited.


(i) TO PERUSE THE STATUS OF WRIT PETITIONS/CIVIL SUIT PENDING BEFORE VARIOUS COURTS.

It is resolved that the status of Writ Petitions/Civil Suit pending

before various Courts be noted. It is also resolved that the Standing

Counsel and other Advocates be requested to take necessary steps for

speedy disposal of the pending cases.

(ii) TO CONSIDER ENHANCEMENT OF SITTING FEE TO THE MEMBERS FOR ATTENDING COUNCIL / COMMITTEE MEETINGS.

It is resolved that the matter be referred to the Finance

Committee for its consideration and submission of a report to the

Executive Committee.

(iii) TO CONSIDER ENHANCEMENT OF SITTING FEE TO THE MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL FOR ATTENDING INTERNEES ETHICS AWARENESS PROGRAMMES CONDUCTED IN VARIOUS MEDICAL COLLEGES IN THE STATE.

It is resolved that the matter be referred to the Finance

Committee for its consideration and submission of a report to the

Executive Committee.

(iv) TOPERUSE THE PAPER CLIPPING ON SUPREME COURT’S JUDGMENT IN

NIMS’ CASE

It is resolved that the Judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the

case between Sri Prashanth S.Dhanaka and NIMS be noted. It is also

resolved that further necessary action be taken on receipt of full text of

the Judgment.

(v) TO CONSIDER ISSUING GUIDELINES ON THE USE OF DEGREES OF FOREIGN COUNTRIES WHICH GIVES THE IMPRESSION OF POST GRADUATE QUALIFICATION.

It is resolved that Circular be sent to all branches of IMA with a

request to advise all their members to display the name of the Country

next to their qualification in order to remove confusion among common

public.

It is also resolved that an advise be given to the doctors having

Post-Graduate qualifications to clearly display (in bracket) their

specialty, after their P.G. qualification, so as to avoid confusion in the

minds of public so that they can know the specialty possessed by the

doctor.

It is further resolved that a brief note be published in IMA Bulletin

in this regard.

The meeting is concluded with vote of thanks to the Chair.

REGISTRAR Sd/- CHAIRMAN APMC APMC

ANDHRA PRADESH MEDICAL COUNCIL: HYDERABAD-500 095



The Executive Committee meeting of the APMC held on 01.07.2009. Dr.Balbeer Singh

Yadav, Chairman, A.P.Medical Council has presided over the meeting. The following are present:

1. Dr.Balbeer Singh Yadav Chairman2. Dr.K.L.Sampath Kumar Vice-Chairman3. Dr.Nagalla Kishore Member4. Dr.E.Ravinder Reddy Member 5. Sri K.Satyanarana Murty Secretary

The Chairman has granted leave of absence to Dr.Cipai Subrahmanyam

who has expressed his inability to attend the meeting.

The meeting of the Executive Committee was presided over by

Dr.Balbeer Singh Yadav, Chairman. The Chairman welcomed the members of

Executive Committee. The members as well as the Secretary greeted the

Chairman on the eve of “Doctors day”. The Chairman directed the Secretary

to take up agenda Items. As per the directions of the Chairman, the

Secretary / Registrar initiated the discussions. Copies of the Minutes of the

Executive Committee dated:20-05-2009, and the Minutes of Ethical & Mal

Practices Committee dated:26-05-2009 and 26-06-2009 have been made

available to all the members of the Executive Committee.

The Executive Committee has first considered the decisions of previous

meeting of the Executive Committee held on 20-05-2009 and the action taken

report on the previous minutes. The members have gone through the notes

provided under this item.

After detailed discussion and taking into consideration of the

submissions made by the Secretary in this respect, it is decided to confirm the

minutes of the previous meeting of the Executive Committee held on 20-05-

2009.

Then the Executive Committee has taken up for consideration of the

next item on the agenda, report of the Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee,

Dated 26-05-2009. The Executive Committee noted that the Ethical & Mal-

Practices Committee has taken up for consideration of Case.No.02/2008, i.e.

Complaint made by Mrs.P.Sailaja against Dr.Y.Savitha Devi, Swapna Nursing

Home, Hyderabad. The Executive Committee also noted that both the parties

appeared before the E&MPC and their statements are on record. The

Executive Committee noted that Expert opinion was sought from a Senior

Cardiologist for her expert opinion and the same is awaited in this case.

The Executive Committee has noted that in Case.No.07/2008, i.e. the

complaint made against Dr.Ajit Vigg the case, the Ethical & Mal Practices

Committee decided to refer the matter to a three-men experts Committee

comprising of one Senior Radiologist, One Senior Chest Physician and One

senior Pathologist. The Executive Committee noted that as per the decision

taken in this regard, the matter has been referred to:

(i) Dr.S.V.Prasad Senior Pulmonoligst, Superintendent TB& Chest Diseases Hospital, Hyd. Hyde (ii) Dr.N.L.N.Murty, Prof. of Radiology, GMC/ Gandhi Hospital, Secunderabad. (iii)Dr.R.S.Ashok Kumar, Professor of Pathology, Osmania Medical College, Hyderabad.

The Executive Committee has also noted that In Case No.08/2008, i.e.

the Complaint made by Sri Gosu Nagabhushanam & Varamma against

Dr.Thumu Rama Krishna, Case No.12/2008, i.e. the Complaint made by

Mrs.Ramalingeswari Devi against Dr.P.Aruna, Aruna Hospitals, Hyderabad. In

Case No.13/2008, Complaint made Sri Ravinder Dwivedi against Dr.Sunil

Kapoor, Care Hospital, Hyderabad, it has been decided to consider the same in

the next meeting of the Committee. The Executive Committee also noted that

the E & MPC has decided to take up Case No.16/2008, Case No.17/2008, and

Case No.18/2008 & Case No.19/2008, Case No.20/2008 Case No.21/2008 and

Case No.22/2008, in the next meeting of the Committee.

The Executive Committee after detailed discussion, decided to approve

the minutes of the meeting of the E&MPC dated 26-05-2009.


next item on the agenda i.e. the minutes of the Ethical & Mal-Practices

Committee, Dated 26-06-2009. The Executive Committee noted that the

Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee, in Case No.22/2008 has examined the

Respondent Dr.L.S.R.Krishna, Cardiologist NIMS and his statement is on

record. The Executive Committee further noted that the complainant, Sri

T.Sambi Reddy did not appear and requested for adjournment of the hearing.

The Executive Committee further noted that in Case No.17/2008, the E

& MPC has examined the Respondent, Dr.G.Subba Rao whereas the

Complainant in this case, Sri Kalluri Adinarayana was absent.

The Executive Committee noted that in case No. 18/2008, the

complainant M.G.Ramulu Yadav was present and submitted an application

stating that originals of xerox copies enclosed to his complaint are missing

and not traceable despite of all his efforts and in the present circumstances

and after careful consideration of legal opinion, he felt it is necessary to seek

the Council’s permission for withdrawal of his complaint made against

Dr.M.Vishnu Vardhan Reddy which is pending for enquiry. The Executive

Committee has noted that the Respondent, Dr.M.V.V.Reddy appeared before

the Committee and his statement is on record. The Executive Committee gone

through his statement and noted that he is running a clinic and do not own Sri

Sai Diagnostic Centre situated in Zaheerabad. He has stated that he is in

Government Service and with regard to the allegation why the display board

in APVVP Hospital, Zaheerabad shows him as orthopedic surgeon, he has

stated that it was fabricated by somebody. He has stated that there are two

staff members in the clinic and they are qualified para medical technicians

and there are no beds in the hospital. It is decided that if the inspection

proposed by CME Committee on various hospitals for violation of Ethics, such

as keeping hoardings and indulging in un-ethical acts is materialized, the

name of respondent’s hospital is to be included.

Then the Executive Committee has noted that in case No. 20/2008 –

Complaint made by Ms. L.Suvarna made against Dr.S.V.Adinarayana Rao,

Visakhapatnam, both the parties have appeared before the committee and

their statements are on record. The Executive Committee has also noted that

the E&MPC counseled the complainant to go to Dr.Adinarayana Rao for

Physiotherapy and other measures as he has assured to help.

Then the Executive Committee had noted that in case No. 21/2008 –

complaint made by Dr.B.Ramachandraiah against Dr.P.Chandra Sekhar,

Director, RIMS and others, the E&MPC has examined both the parties and their

statements are record. The Executive Committee noted that

Dr.Ramachandraiah brought this complaint relying upon rule 7.7 of IMC

Regulations 2002 which inter-alia deals with signing professional certificates,

reports and other documents and the complainant has stated that the

Respondent have given improper reports with a fabricated, false, malicious

intention without any basis. The EC also noted that the Counsel for

Respondents have stated that the crux of the complaint was that the

complainant has been transferred from RIMS to another institution and his

application has been dismissed by AP Administrative Tribunal on merits.

Then the Executive Committee has noted that in Case No.08/2008 i.e.

complaint made by Sri Gosu Nagabhushanam & Varamma aginast Dr.Thumu

Rama Krishna, New Life Multi Specialist Hospital, Khammam, the E&MPC

Committee made its detailed observations/recommendations for consideration

of the Executive Committee for its decision. The Executive Committee has

gone through the complaint other material on record and statements of the

parties concerned. The Executive Committee noted that the complainants

stated that the patient was not conscious after operation. It was further stated

that the patient was conscious at the time of admission and his condition was

very good; no problem to the patient – just minor injuries. It was stated that

operation was conducted at 06.30 PM – 10.00 PM on 06.01.2008 and the

patient expired after 04.00 PM on 07.01.2008. It was also stated that the

patient was diabetic. As to the question about the cause of death, they have

stated that the doctor was absconding after death and according to the

doctor, the patient died of cardiac arrest. They contended that it was

negligent treatment. It was also stated that the patient expired after reaching

to Dr.Gopinath Hospital. The Executive Committee gone through the

statement of the Respondent. He has stated that in his hospital specilities like

Critical Care, General Medicine, General Surgery, Paediatrics, Orthopaedics,

Maxillo Facial Surgery, Cardiology, Urology, Neurosurgery and Physiotherapy,

Pathology and Bio-chemistry. Basic equipment like ECG, Cardiac Monitor,

Multi-para Monitor, NIBP, Syringe Pumps, Infusion Pumps, De-fibrillator and

Ventilators are available in the Hospital for Cardiac patients. It was stated that

the patient sustained facial injuries and head injury and patient was in

drunken state and responding to verbal commands. It was also stated that the

drunken state of the patient was not mentioned in the case-sheet as the

patient’s attendants request not to mention drunken state. It has been stated

that, they occasionally give paper ads in that they expose the services

available in the hospital. It was also stated that Patient got acute Anterior Wall

MI with Cardiogenic shock and subsequently patient died due to sudden

Cardio Respiratory Arrest at Spandana Hospital. As to the question whether

the patient recovered or not, the Respondent stated that during Intra-

operative and immediate post operative period stable and un-eventful. Patient

shifted to post-operative ward after thorough Anaesthesia. It was further

stated that on the next day of operation, i.e. 07.01.2008 till 04.30 PM patient

was stable and after that he went to bathroom, he smoked and after that

immediately he collapsed itself. Nursing Staff and the respondent took him to

ICU and started treatment. Patient complained of severe chest pain radiating

to back and left shoulder and patient became very breathless and irritable.

Pulse rate was 122 per minute, BP 70/60 MMHG. Immediately started Oxygen

and take ECG and it was explained to the patient’s attendants regarding the

condition of patient. Immediately, the Cardiologist by name Dr.Gopinath was

called. He examined the case and explained the poor prognosis of the patient

to the patient’s attendants. The respondent further stated that after the

patient was shifted to Spandana Hospital between 05.15 PM–05.30 PM where

patient expired at 09.30 PM. As to the question whether resuscitative

measures recorded in the case sheet, the respondent stated that they could not

record the resuscitative measures as they were very hurry to save the patient

and shifted the patient to another hospital and meantime the patient’s

attendants threatened the nursing staff and taken away the case sheet

without any permission.

Taking into consideration of the entire material on record, it is decided

to approve the findings of E&MPC, ‘that there is no negligence on the part of

Respondent Dr.Thumu Ramakrishna, in treating the patient Gosu Ananda

Rao’. The Executive Committee also approves further findings of E&MPC ‘the

allegation that the patient died in New Life Multi Speciality Hospital is not

proved’. Having noted that the Respondent has stated that they occasionally

give paper ads, the Executive Committee decided to accept the recommendation of

the E&MPC ’that he should be warned not to give wide publicity which will

glorify his personal image. He should also be warned to keep the records

properly about the patient.

Then the Executive Committee has considered the

observations/recommendations of Ethical & Mal Practices Committee in Case

No. 24/2008– the complaint made by Dr.Kylas Pabba against Dr.A.Sai Ravi

Shanker. The Executive Committee noted that the complainant in his

complaint dated 16-12-2008 has alleged that the Respondent Doctor did PGDC

at NIMS and he is displaying D.Card (NIMS), DNB Card (NIMS) and acting as

consultant Cardiologist and also independent Cardiologist. The Executive

Committee noted that the E&MPC has observed that the Respondent had

expressed his ignorance and stated that he

was under impression that he was entitled to display DNB–Cardiology. The

Executive Committee further noted the observation of the E&MPC that “that

Dr.Sai Ravi Shanker got himself registered with Andhra Pradesh Medical

Council in the month of February, 2009 whereas he is practising in Karimnagar

for the past 5 years which is contrary to the provisions of Andhra Pradesh

Medical Practitioners Registration Act, 1968.” The Committee felt that his

statement that ‘he registered in Orissa and he do not know that he has to

register again in Andhra Pradesh’ is not convincing. After taking into

consideration of entire material on record and the statements made by the

parties concerned, the Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee observed that the

acts of the Respondent, Dr.Sai Ravi Shankar are not in conformity with the IMC

Regulations, 2002. The Committee has once again gone through the material

filed on behalf of the complainant and noted that the respondent is displaying

‘D.Card (NIMS) & DNB Card (NIMS)’ in his prescription pads. The Committee is

of the view that the respondent has not cleared DNB (Cardiology) and even if

his contention that he has obtained ‘D.Card (NIMS)’, he is not justified in using

either of these Diplomas. The Committee noted that according to IMC

Regulations, 2002 it will be unethical on the part of a Medical Practitioner to

suffix un-recognized degree/diploma to his name in his letter pad, prescription

pad or sign board. During the enquiry it was made clear to the respondent

that ‘D.Card (NIMS) is an unrecognized diploma and using the same will be an

un-ethical act on any count. The Committee has taken into consideration of

the view expressed by the Complainant that ‘the respondent should not

practice as consultant Cardiologist and he should not exhibit DNB or DM in any

way’. The Committee has considered the further statement of the complainant

that he has noticed illegal practices done by the respondent but unable to

provide necessary evidence in this regard. After careful consideration of the

material on record and taking into consideration of the observations of

E&MPC, the Executive Committee decided to approve the recommendations of

E&MPC and decided ‘that the respondent deserve to be warned for his un-

ethical acts such as using DNB (Cardiology) with out possessing the same and

displaying ‘D.Card (NIMS)’ which is an un-recognized qualification and

admittedly practising in Karimnagar for the past (5) Five years but got himself

registered in APMC for his MBBS as well as MD (General Medicine) in February,

2009 consequent on registered notice received from the Council’. The

Executive Committee recommends to the General Body to warn the

respondent for his un-ethical acts noted above.

Then the Executive Committee considered the

observations/recommendations of E&MPC in Case No. 22/2007 – the complaint

made by Sri B.Kishore against Dr.Bachu Radhakrishna. The Executive

Committee noted that the Complaint B.Kishore alleged that the Respondent

has given wrong treatment to his father and put the entire family in mental

agony. The Executive Committee noted that the patient B.Prakash admitted in

Satya Hospital on 23-05-2007 and treated by the Respondent, Dr.Batchu

Radha Krishna and operation was done after four days of admission. The

patient was discharged on 06.06.2007. Again the patient’s condition has

become serious and was admitted in the hospital on 08.06.2007 and second

operation was done on 13.06.2007. The patient was discharged on

18.07.2007. As the patient was suffering from serious stomach pain and went

into unconscious condition, on 18.07.2007 he was taken to Kamineni Hospital,

Hyderabad and he was treated for 22 days there and was discharged on

08.08.2007. The complainant contended that the doctors at Kamineni Hospital

expressed the view that the condition of the patient has worsen due to the

negligence of the Respondent. As the patient was treated by Dr.Jaydip Ray

Chaudhuri at Kamineni Hospitals, Hyderabad, he was requested to offer his

explanation as to the treatment given to the patient, B.Prakash at Kamineni

Hospital, Hyderabad. Accordingly, he has filed his reply affidavit and other

material for consideration of the Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee. As per the

notice issued in this regard, he has appeared himself before the Committee on

30.04.2009 and his statement is on record. The respondent, Dr.Batchu Radha

Krishna was furnished with the copy of reply affidavit filed by Dr.Jaydip Ray

Chaudhuri, other material and his statement made before the Committee on

30.04.2009, to enable him to go through the same and make his defence in

the meeting of the Committee held on 26.05.2009. Dr.Batchu Radha Krishna

appeared before the Committee on 26.05.2009 and made the following

statement.

1. Whether you are accepting the statement and affidavit filed by

Dr.Jay Dip Ray Chaudhuri? Are you differing the same and if so the

reasons for the same?

Ans. I am not accepting the statement made by Dr.Jay Dip Ray

Chaudhury.

Here enclosing four sheets to differ.

2. Whether the patient was discharged in a stable condition?

Ans. Yes, discharged the patient in stable condition with the post-

operative wound healed to near normal (less than ¼ Inch raw

area present).

3. Do you have any misunderstanding with the patient or their

attendants ?

Ans. At the time of discharge patient’s attendants argued with the

hospital

for the infection and for the bill. The hospital clarified for the

infection

and the bill also reduced to the maximum extent as the hospital

collected only visiting consultants charges (apart from me seven

other consultants given their services for the benefit of the

patient, with their valuable services I could able to discharge

the patient in normal condition).

4. Are you satisfied about Surgical Management at the time of Surgery?

Ans. Yes, totally satisfied because surgery was performed with

maximum aseptic precautions, with vertical laminar air flow was

used in the O.T., two Anaesthetists given their services and I

performed the procedure along with Dr.Kranthi Kumar, M.S.

(Ortho.) another competent Orthopaedic Surgeon to perform

Laminectomy Operation.

5. What is your final Conclusion regarding this case?

Ans. Sir, as I kept every thing in-front of you please close the file at

the earliest so that I cannot be disturbed further.

The Executive Committee noted that the E&MPC has once again gone

through the statement made by Dr.Jay Dip Ray Chaudhuri before the

Committee on 30.04.2009 and noted that on the day of admission, patient

was alert, complained of severe abdominal (lower) pain and had weakness of

both lower limbs. He had bowel incontinence. Investigation reports show: RBS-

135, Urea-88 (reative-6 Na-139, K-48, Hb 10.1gm% TLC 7600 Plauleb 1058

lacs, ESR-85 (UE-Puscells-Plenty, RBC+, Alt+). He has stated that patient did

not bring any report with him and investigations conducted at Kamineni

Hospital revealed ARF. Patient had ARF and epidural abscess with high

creatinine levels at admission. Since this issue pertains to Nephrology and

Neuro Surgery, he stated that he is not the correct person to comment about

negligence in the case of this patient.

The Executive Committee noted that the E&MPC has gone through the

affidavit filed by Dr.Jay Dip Ray Chaudhuri and noted that the patient was

given treatment at Kamineni Hospital from 18.07.2007 to 08.08.2007 under

his supervision as senior consultant Neurologist. In the affidavit it was stated

that after necessary investigations like CUE, Creatinine Levels and USG

Abdomen, he was diagnosed to have urinary tract infection, acute renal

failure, retention of urine and epidural abscess. It was further stated that he

recovered and his creatinine levels came down to near normal and he was

discharged when he was ambulant on 08.08.2007.

The Executive Committee noted that the Ethical & Mal Practices

Committee has gone through the affidavit filed by the respondent, Dr.Batchu

Radha Krishna, where he stated that ‘the patient was recovered, his general

condition was good, all vitals were stable and got full neurological recovery,

hypertension was under control, suture lined healed well as such the patient

was discharged from his Hospital on 06-06-2007’ and admittedly the patient

was taken to Kamineni Hospitals on 18-07-2007, i.e. with a gap of 42 days. As

to the allegation of the Complainant that the Respondent has not taken full

care and negligently treated the patient, thereby caused huge financial loss

and physical disability, the E & MPC noted that the Respondent denied the

same. After taking into consideration of the entire material on record, after

careful consideration of the Affidavits filed by Dr.Batchu Radha Krishna,

Dr.Jaydip Ray Chaudhury and the statements made by the parties concerned,

the Ethical & Mal Practices Committee observed that ‘there is no negligence

on the part of Dr.Batchu Radha Krishna in treating the patient B.Prakash. ‘The

Executive Committee noted that E&MPC has considered the objections raised

by the Respondent, Dr.Batchu Radha Krishna before it on 26-5-2009 that he

has already appeared before the committee earlier and his statement is on

record. The E&MPC has noted that he has referred to Rule-6 of APMC Enquiry

Rules, 1978. The E&MPC observed that the respondent has quoted Rule-6 of

the Rules erroneously and the said Rule deals with ‘the complaint to be

reduced to writing and verified by oath or solemn affirmation of the

complainant’ and further procedure required to be observed by the Committee

to make a preliminary enquiry. The E&MPC noted that according to the proviso

given under Rule 4 (2) of the Rules says that “The Committee appointed to

make a preliminary enquiry shall have power to cause further investigation to

be made and take further evidence and also any legal advice or procure any

legal assistance as it may think necessary”. The E&MPC also observed that his

objections are not maintainable in view of APMC Enquiry Rules, 1978. The

Committee is of the opinion that examination of the Respondent, Dr.Batchu

Radha Krishna has become necessary in view of the allegations made by the

Complainant that ‘the patient was admitted in Kamineni Hospital and the

doctors conducted all neurology, nephrology tests and treated him for 22 days

and was discharged on 08-08-2007’. The Complainant also contended that the

doctors at Kamineni Hospital have stated that the patient’s condition has

become serious as treatment was not given at an appropriate time by a

competent doctor and on account of negligence. Having considered the

complaint and taking into consideration of the fact that the Patient was

treated at Kamineni Hospitals, Hyderabad and the contention of the

Complainant that they had incurred an expenditure of Rs.3,86,600/-, the

Committee in its meeting held on 16-09-2008 has decided to issue notice to

Dr.Jay Dip Ray Chaudhury calling for his explanation as to the treatment given

to the patient, Sri B.Prakash at Kamineni Hospitals, Hyderabad. Accordingly,

Dr.Jay Dip Ray Chaudhury has submitted his reply affidavit and Case-sheet

pertaining to the patient. The Committee has examined him on 30-04-2009.

After taking into consideration of the observations/recommendations of

E & MPC and on perusal of the entire material on record, it is decided to

approve the observation/ recommendation of the E & MPC that ‘there is no

negligence on the part of Dr.Batchu Radha Krishna in treating the patient

B.Prakash’. The Executive Committee also noted the objections raised by the

Respondent, Dr.Batchu Radha Krishna in summoning him 2nd time by the

E&MPC and approved the observations of the Ethical & Mal Practices

Committee that ‘the examination of Respondent, Dr.Batchu Radhakrishna has

become necessary in view of the allegations made by the complainant that

the patient was admitted in Kamineni Hospital and had been treated there for

22 days under the supervision of Dr.Jaidip Ray Chadhury and thereby had to

incur an expenditure of Rs.3,86,600/- and was discharged on 08-08-2007 and

in view of the contentions raised by the Complainant that the doctors at

Kamineni Hospital had stated that the patient’s condition has become serious

as treatment was not given at an appropriate time by a competent doctor and

on account of his negligence.’

Then the Executive Committee has gone through the observations /

recommendations of the E & MPC in Case No.12/2008, the complaint made by

Mrs.Ramalingeswari Devi against Dr.P.Aruna, Hyderabad. The Executive

Committee noted that the complainant alleged that “After conceiving the

pregnancy, she visited Dr.P.Aruna for consultation and that she used to go

every month checkup, she had undergone scanning on 03-02-2007 at DBR

diagnosis, Dilsuknagar, Hyderabad. After completing 8 months, the

doctor refused to take up the case until delivery. The reason she said was that

the patient is HBSAg Positive for that, her hospital is not equipped to counter

this problem. Until 8 months doctor said that the Baby’s condition was good.

After 8 months all the difficulties started”. The EC also noted that the

complainant contended that due to negligence on the part of doctor and

diagnosis centre, they lost their baby. The Executive Committee has gone

through the reply affidavit of the Respondent, Dr.P.Aruna that ‘it is not true

that the doctor refused to continue on the ground of patient being HBSAg

Positive as alleged by her since the complainant was under her care even

after being detected positive” The Executive Committee has gone through her

statement and noted that ‘that some congenital anomalies can be picked up

at the end of 3rd month and some at later stage of gestation. IUGR can be

picked up only by serial scans done after six months. As to the question

whether it was a fact that she has not taken up the patient for delivery as the

patient was HBSAg Positive, she has stated negatively. As to further question

as to why she has not repeated the ultrasound at the time of last visit of the

patient, i.e. on 05-05-2007, within 32 weeks, she has stated that she would

have repeated the Ultrasound if the patient had reported for her next visit

which was scheduled after 15 days. The Executive Committee noted that as

per the direction given in this regard, Dr.P.Aruna has submitted necessary

evidence to the E&MPC to show that she had taken up HBSAg Positive cases

for delivery and cesarean sections. After taking into consideration of the entire

material on record the Executive Committee decided to approve the

observations / recommendations of the E&MPC that ‘there is no negligence on

the part of Dr.P.Aruna in treating he complainant, Mrs.C.Ramalingeswari Devi’

Then the Executive Committee taken up for consideration of the

observations/ recommendations of the Ethical & Mal practices Committee in

Case no.13/2008 – the complaint made by Sri Ravinder Dwivedi against

Dr.Sunil Kapoor of Care Hospital, Hyderabad. The Executive Committee noted

that the complainant is the head of a Non-governmental organization and

made a complaint to the Minister of State, Home Affairs, Govt. of India and the

said has received several complaints against Care Hospital, Nampally,

Hyderabad. The Complainant alleged that ‘one by name Laxmi Bai, aged 88

years admitted in Care Hospital on 15-10-2007 and Dr.Sunil Kapoor under

whom the patient admitted did not bother to visit the patient till 16-10-2007.

After lot of efforts, the attendant, Mr. Sham met Dr.Sunil Kapoor and he told

him that patient’s respiratory system completely collapsed for that he asked

him to deposit Rs.1,00,000/- and then only he will start treatment. The

complainant Mr.Shyam asked about the type of Medical Prescription, the

respondent became angry and abused him and filthy language and warned to

take his patient back and prepared a false discharged report and bill for an

amount of Rs.13,892/-. The complainant further contended that lastly relatives

of the patient shifted her to Woodland Hospital where proper care and

attention was paid by the doctor and the patient recovered there and feeling

more comfortable’. The Executive Committee has gone through the reply

affidavit filed by the respondent, Dr.Sunil Kapoor and noted that he has stated

that all the allegations are false, mischievous and made without any proof and

also defamatory. The Executive Committee noted that the complainant did

not appear before the committee whereas the Respondent, Dr.Sunil Kapoor

was present before the committee on 26-05-2009 and his statement is on

record. He has stated that the patient was under his care and the condition of

the patient and on his requisition, Dr.Sunanda, Pulmonologist has been

consulted. To another question he has stated that the patient’s attendant

thought that the hospital is expensive and wanted to be shifted to smaller

nursing home and the patient was shifted in the hospital ambulance to Wood

Lands Nursing Home along with trained paramedical staff to drop them safely.

The Executive Committee noted that the respondent Dr.Sunil Kapoor has

submitted the case sheet pertaining to the patient Mrs.Laxmi Bai to the

E&MPC subsequently. After taking into consideration of the entire material on

record, the statement of Dr.Sunil Kapoor, the Executive Committee approved

the findings of E&MP Committee that ‘there was no negligence on the part of

Dr.Sunil Kapoor in treating the patient, Mrs.Laxmi Bai’.

The Executive Committee noted that in the complaint made by

Mrs.P.Sailaja against Dr.Savitha Devi, the matter has been referred to

Dr.C.Shakuntala for her expert opinion and the same is awaited.

The Executive Committee also noted that in the complaint made by

Sri.A.V.Manikya Rao against Dr.Agit Vigg, the matter has been referred to

three-men expert committee and the expert opinion is awaited.

The Executive Committee further noted that in the complaint made by

Mrs.Krishnapatnam Sarada against Dr.G.Mythili, the matter has been referred

to a senior most gynecologist for her expert opinion and the same is awaited.

The Executive Committee also noted that in Case No. 16/2008 the

Respondent did not submit his explanation and as such the E&MPC decided to

issue summons to the Respondent, the Medical Superintendent, Heritage

Hospitals, Somajiguda, Hyderabad directing him to appear before the

committee in its next meeting.

The Executive Committee also noted that in Case No.03/2009, the

complaint made by Md.Reyaz against Dr.Sameer Diwale, consultant

Cardiovascular and thoracic surgeon, Wockhardt Heart Hospitals, Kamineni

Hospitals Hyderabad and & Dr.K.Satyanarayana consultant Paediatrician,

Kamineni Hospital Hyderabad, it was decided to take up this item by the

E&MPC as and when the explanations of Respondents doctors received.

The Executive Committee after careful consideration, decided to approve

the action taken by E&MPC in all the above cases.

Then the Executive committee has taken up for consideration of next

item on the agenda i.e. to peruse the financial position of the APMC as on

27-06-2009 and the Executive Committee noted that the total deposits

amounted to Rs.4,20,30,098/- out of which an amount of Rs.50,55,098 is in

various SB Accounts. Having noted that there is a balance of Rs.47,02,749/- in

the SB account of Andhra Bank as on 26-06-2009, it is decided that hereafter

as and when the balance amount in SB account exceeds Rs.20 Lakhs the

same shall be kept in Fixed Deposit, leaving an amount of Rs.8,00,000/- for

meeting the expenditure on Salaries and other expenditure of the Council.

Then the Executive Committee has taken up for consideration of next

item on the agenda, i.e. to consider and purchase of Printers for Computer -3

& 4 of the Council. After perusal of the notes provided under this item and

explanation given by the Secretary in this regard, it is decided to purchase

two HP Model Printers on buy-back old SAMSUNG Company Printers after

observing usual procedure.


item on the agenda, i.e. to Consider and approve the decision to purchase

laptops based technical opinion received. The Executive Committee has gone

through the notes provided under this item. The Executive Committee has

also gone through the minutes of the General Body Meeting held on 16-12-

2008 and noted that “the General Body considered the proposal of providing

Lap-tops to all the Members of the Council in view of necessity for Electronic

Transmission of data / information from the office of the Council and in order

to retrieve huge data available on MCI website, website of IMRA, National

Board, General Medical Council, U.K. and other National and International

Organisations. After detailed discussion and taking into consideration all

related issues, it is decided that Lap-tops be purchased from the funds

available under CME Account at SBI, Isamia Bazar Branch and provided to all

the Elected and Nominated Members of the Council at an early date. It is also

decided to authorize Chairman, APMC and the Chairman, Finance Committee

to take necessary action to obtain quotations for the purchase of Lap-tops of

Dell / Sony and the Secretary shall arrange to purchase the same. It is also

decided to meet the funds required from CME A/c.”

The members of the Executive Committee are also of the view that

there is need for providing laptops to the members to enable the Council’s

office to send minutes of meetings of the Council and other important

communications in a speedier manner. The members expressed the view that

as and when they attend to Internees Ethics Awareness programmes and

other CME programmes, the laptops will be more useful. After detailed

discussion and taking into consideration of the technical advise provided by

Executive Engineer, office of Commissioner APVVP and taking into

consideration of the fact that ACER dual core model laptops are covered under

DGS&D rate contract and in view of the advanced options, after sale service

and 2 years warranty with webcam and provision for service at the place of

members native place, it is decided to approve the proposal for purchase of

17 pieces of ACER Dual Core model laptops at a cost of Rs.32,890/- per each

plus usual taxes. It is also decided to authorize the Secretary to enter into

Memorandum of Understanding with the supplier as per the approval obtained

from the Chairman and supply the same to the members before 15th July 2009.

It is also decided that in the case of members who term is less than 3 months,

the laptops shall be kept with the Secretary and the same will be supplied to

the successors in office. It is also decided that the laptops shall be provided to

the members during their tenure as members of the Council and on expiry of

the term they shall hand over the same to the office of the Council so has to

provide the same to their successors in office.


item on the agenda, i.e. to Review the latest stage of alienation of land to the

Council’s Building. The Executive Committee has gone through the notes

provided under this item and noted that in the meeting of General Body held

on 31-03-2009 the then Director of Health, Dr.Ramesh Chandra that there was

proposal pending before the Government for its consideration to construct a

building for Para Medical Board, High Power Committee, Camp Office of NTR

UHS and proposed that APMC and other Councils may be accommodated in

two or three floors of the same building complex. The Executive Committee

noted that the proposed Programme of construction of building complex is not

yet finalized for various reasons. After detailed discussion it is decided to

pursue the matter pending before the Government for allotment of land

adjacent and including the existing Council’s Building to have our own

identity. It is also decided to submit a representation to the Minister for

Medical Education to expedite the matter and also request the Present

Director of Health to send specific recommendations for allotment of the land

of the APMC for construction of proposed combined Council’s Building.

To Consider Any other item with the permission of the Chairman:-

Under this item, the Executive Committee considered the following items and discussed on the same.

9 (1) To peruse the direction of Hon’ble High Court in W.P.No.

10889/2009.

The Executive Committee noted the direction Hon’ble High Court in W.P.No.

10889/2009 which was filed by Dr.M.A.Gafoor and 20 others against MCI and

APMC is coming for hearing on 03-07-2009. The Executive Committee perused

the notes provided under this item. It is noted that Vakalat has been filed in

this respect. After detailed discussion, it is decided that the matter be pursued

with the Standing Counsel of the APMC and see that Counter Affidavit is

submitted at an appropriate time.

Item No.9 (2): To Accord Registration to Dr.J.Sai Kavitha as per

the decision of the General Body:- The Executive Committee gone through

the notes provided under this item and noted that the decision of Executive

Committee in its meeting held on 20-01-2009, which has been approved by

General Body on the same day, the same has not been implemented as the

dealing clerk has sought declaration book and specific direction of the EC on

treating Dr.J.Sai Kavitha as purported to have submitted her application in the

month of May 2004. The Executive Committee decided to direct the dealing

clerk to issue permanent registration to Dr.J.Sai Kavitha as per the decision

taken earlier in its meeting held on 31-03-2009. The notes submitted by

Senior Asst (K) and AO will be examined and decision taken separately. It is

also decided to obtain signature and thumb impression of the candidate by e-

mail. In this regard members felt that non implementation of decisions

amount to disobedience and the same shall be viewed seriously. It is also

decided to issue written warning to her to be more careful in future and

implement the decisions of Executive Committee in toto, failing which she

deserves for appropriate disciplinary action.

Item No. 9(3): To Pay the Balance Amount to M/s.Team Engineer

Systems Pvt. Ltd, Kukatpally, Hyderabad.

Members have gone through the notes provided under this item and noted

that an amount of Rs.71,500/- was paid to suppliers, M/s. Team Engineer

Systems Pvt. Ltd who have completed the work of installation and also

demonstrated the same to the Chairman and the system is found working

satisfactorily. As such it is decided that the balance amount of Rs.89,487/- be

paid to M/s. Team Engineer Systems Pvt. Ltd, Hyderabad.

Item No. 9(4): Payment of enhancement of consolidated pay to

Smt. L.Madhavi Latha, Assistant

Members have gone through the notes provided under this item and noted

that the Chairman Finance Committee, Dr.V.Ramprasad came to the office

recently as considered the representation of Smt. L.Madhavi Latha for

appointment in regular pay scale. After careful consideration, she was of the

view that she may be paid enhanced consolidated pay of Rs.9000/- w.e.f.01-

06-2009. After detailed discussion, it has been decided to consider her request

as approved by Chairman Finance Committee and to pay enhanced

consolidated pay of Rs.9000/- w.e.f.01-06-2009.

Item No.9 (5) : To Sanction notional increment to

Smt.D.Varalakshmi

in the category of Typist and fixation of pay as Senior Assistant.

The Members have gone through the attached note. After detailed

discussion it is decided to sanction an increment in the selection grade scale

of pay of Typist w.e.f.01.06.2009 and pay fixed under F.R. 22 (a) (1) in the

Category of Sr.Assistant.

Item No.9 (6) : To review the Work of Staff of APMC with

reference to

instructions issued to staff and also to review the in-discipline

trends

among few staff members.

The members have gone through the notes provided under this item as

certain instances have come to the notice of the members of the Executive

Committee, which are clear indications of indiscipline among certain staff

members. The Secretary brought to the notice of members that on 28-08-

2007, an office memo was issued to all the staff members directing them not

to go to the press directly or indirectly getting some matter published either to

blackmail the colleagues or the Registrar or Chairman or Chairpersons of the

Committees and other members with ulterior motives and it was made clear

that disciplinary action will be initiated against those persons or others who

cooperated them to get those false matters published. The Secretary also

brought to the notice of the members that another memo was issued

informing all the staff members that “Evaluation Report” will be prepared

indicating the performance of each employee. It was also brought to the

notice of members that another office order was issued in February 2009,

reiterating the earlier directions of the Council.

After detailed discussion, the members expressed unanimous view that

the Council shall enforce stringent provisions as per the CCA rules and other

Disciplinary Rules. It is necessary to bring strict discipline and accountability

among the staff members. The Executive Committee made it clear that

instructions shall be issued to the staff members reiterating the stand of the

Council so that if any staff member approaches Government or Higher

Authority directly without brining the same to the notice of Chairman or

Registrar, such acts of staff members shall attract disciplinary action for

disobedience of the instructions and suitable action will have to be initiated as

per the rules governing the disciplinary cases. It is also decided that a draft

memo may be prepared after consulting the standing counsel of APMC and

issued to the Staff Members after obtaining approval of the Chairman.

In this regard, the Executive Committee has taken note of the fact that

some of the staff members are defying the decisions taken by Executive

Committee and approved by General Body. It is decided that hereafter any

staff member is found disobeying the decisions taken by the Executive

Committee or the Chairman, strict disciplinary action shall have to be initiated

against such erring staff members.

Then, Dr.N.Kishore, Member of the Executive Committee with the

permission of the Chairman has mentioned in the meeting that, when the

Chairman, Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee and other members of the

Committee were entering the office, some of the staff members sat outside the office and

chitchatting and on seeing the members, they turned their faces in smiling mood, without

expressing minimum protocol required to be observed. He has also mentioned before the

E.C. that two or three staff members are also not observing protocols when the Chairman

and Registrar entering the office. The Committee observed that the accepted way of

behaviour in a particular situation has to be followed by the Staff members. The Executive

Committee is of the unanimous opinion that the staff members be directed to follow the

protocols in the office and shall be in their seats during the office hours.

It has been decided that instructions will have to be issued to all the staff members

directing them in this regard. All the staff members are directed to observe protocols

whenever the Chairman, Vice-Chairman, Chairpersons of the Committees, Members of the

Committees, Members of the Council and Registrar enters the office and non-observance

of protocols as mentioned above shall be treated as disobedience and disciplinary action

will be initiated against erring staff member, apart from recording this attitude in the

evaluation reports which forms basis for release of increments and promotions etc. It was

also decided to issue instructions to the staff members, the act of those who

sits outside the office and Chit-Chat and laugh unawares of the presence of

the Chairman, Vice-Chairman, other Chair Persons, Members and Registrar of

the Council would be treated also as disobedience and disciplinary action will

be initiated against such erring staff.

After detailed discussion, it is decided that instructions shall be issued to

all the staff members directing them to observe protocols whenever the

Chairman, Vice-Chairman, Members of the Council or Committee or the

Registrar enters the office and such non-observance of protocols shall be

treated as disobedience and disciplinary action shall follow. The Executive

Committee made it clear that instructions shall be issued to the staff members

reiterating the stand of the Council so that if any staff member approaches

Government or Higher Authority directly without brining the same to the

notice of Chairman or Registrar, such acts of staff members shall attract

disciplinary action for disobedience of the instructions and suitable action will

have to be initiated as per the rules governing the disciplinary cases.

Then the Executive Committee has taken up the following items

under informal agenda 9 (6) (i) Informal Agenda – to Enhance

conveyance to Staff Members from Rs.750/- to Rs.1,000/-.

The Secretary brought to the notice of the members that one of the staff

members came with a request that the conveyance allowance paid @ Rs.750/-

pm be enhanced to Rs.1,000/- in view of the increased cost of transportation.

After detailed discussion and taking into consideration of the fact that the

conveyance allowance of Rs.750/-pm is being paid w.e.f.01-07-2008, it is

decided to refer the matter for consideration of the Finance Committee and

place the matter before the Executive Committee for a decision.

9 (6) (ii)-To provide housing loans to Staff members of APMC

The Secretary brought to the notice of the Executive Committee that there

has been orally representation of some of the staff members for sanction of

housing loans. It is also brought to the notice of members of the Executive

Committee that a memorandum of understanding is being executed with the

authorities of Bank of Baroda, Banjarahills, Hyderabad. After completion of

this, the bank will provide housing and other loans to all the eligible

employees of the Council. After taking into consideration the accepted norm of

giving undertaking for recovery of loan amount from the salary of the

concerned employee, it is decided that Council has to given undertaking on

behalf of the Loanee employees that in case of default, the loan installment

shall be recovered from the salary of the concerned employee and remitted to

the bank.

9 (6) (iii)-To consider photo scanned on the Registration

Certificates issued by the Council:

The Vice-chairman brought to the notice of the members that photos on the

registrations certificates are being pasted which may in some occasions cause

for tampering. As such it is suggested that photos on the registration

certificates be scanned in order to prevent tampering. It is also brought to the

notice of the members that the same procedure is followed in NTR University

of Health Sciences and other universities while issuing degrees. After detailed

discussion, it is decided to consider preparing modalities in this direction, such

as upgrading the existing project so as to suit that scanned photo will appear

on the registration certificate, maintenance of server connected to all systems

covered under registration project and LAN connection. It is also decided that

all registration data such as PG Registration, Change of Address and other

changes shall appear in the main server in addition to the manual corrections

done to the medical register. It is also decided that immediate steps and

obtain technical advice and place a report before the Executive Committee in

its next meeting.

After detailed discussion and after taking into consideration of the material

placed before it, the Executive Committee passed the following resolutions

unanimously.

1. TO CONFIRM THE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE

COMMITTEE HELD ON 20-05-2009.

It is resolved that the minutes of previous meeting of the Executive

Committee held on 20.05.2009 be confirmed.

2. TO PERUSE THE ACTION TAKEN REPORT ON THE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS

MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE.

It is resolved that the action taken report on the minutes of previous meeting of the

Executive Committee be approved.

3. TO PERUSE THE STATISTICS RELATING TO REGISTRATIONS DONE DURING

THE PERIOD OF 20-05-2009 – 27-06-2009.

It is also resolved that the Statistics relating to Registrations done during the period of

20.05.2009 – 27.06.2009 be noted.

4. TO CONSIDER THE REPORTS OF THE ETHICAL & MAL-PRACTICES

COMMITTEE DATED 26-05-2009 AND 26-06-2009.

(A) It is also resolved that the observations/recommendations of the Ethical & Mal-Practices

Committee dt:26.05.2009 be approved.

(B) It is resolved that the observations/recommendations of the Ethical & Mal-Practices

Committee dt:26.06.2009 be approved.

(i) The decision of E&MPC in Case.No.02/2008 in referring the matter to an

expert Cardiologist be approved.

(ii) The decision of E&MPC in Case.No.07/2008 in referring the matter to a three

men committee of Senior Pulmonologist, Prof. of Radiology & Prof. of

Pathology be approved.

(iii) The non-appearance of the complainant, Sri Kalluri Adinarayana in

Case.No.17/2008, be noted. The appearance of respondent, Dr.G.Subba Rao

whose statement is on record be noted.

(iv) The application of the complainant in Case.No.18/2008, i.e. M.G.Ramulu Yadav

seeking permission of the Council for withdrawal of his complaint be noted. The

statement of respondent, Dr.M.Vishnu Vardhan Reddy be noted.

(v) The statements of the complainant, Ms.Suvarna and the respondent,

Dr.S.V.Adinarayana Rao in Case.No.20/2008 be noted.

(vi) The statements of the complainant, Dr.B.Ramachandraiah and the respondents,

Dr.P.Chandra Sekhar and others in Case.No.21/2008 be noted.

(vii) It is resolved that the observations/recommendations of E&MPC in

Case.No.08/2008 ‘that there is no negligence on the part of respondent

Dr.Thumu Ramakrishna, in treating the patient Gosu Ananda Rao’ be

approved. It is also resolved that the observation of E & MPC that ‘the

allegation that the patient died in New Life Multi Speciality Hospital is snot

proved’ be approved. It is further resolved that the recommendation of the

E&MPC that ‘he should be warned not to give wide publicity which will glorify

his personal image’ be approved.

(viii) It is resolved that the observations/recommendations of E&MPC in

Case.No.24/2008 ‘that the respondent deserve to be warned for his un-ethical

acts such as using DNB (Cardiology) with out possessing the same and

displaying ‘D.Card (NIMS) which is un-recognized qualification and admittedly

practicing in Karimnagar for the past five years but got himself registered in

APMC for his MBBS as well as MD (General Medicine) in Feb,2009

consequent on registered notice from the Council’ be approved.

(ix) It is resolved that the observations/recommendations of E&MPC in

Case.No.22/2007 that ‘there is no negligence on the part of Dr.Batchu

Radhakrishna in treating the patient B.Prakash’ be approved. It is also resolved

that the further observation of the E&MPC ‘that the objections of the

respondent, Dr.Batchu Radha Krishna are not maintainable in view of APMC

Enquiry Rules, 1978’ be approved.

(x) It is resolved that the observations/recommendations of E&MPC in

Case.No.12/2008 that ‘there is no negligence on the part of Dr.P.Aruna in

treating he complainant, Mrs.C.Ramalingeswari Devi’ be approved.

(xi) It is resolved that the observations/recommendations of E&MPC in

Case.No.13/2008 that ‘there was no negligence on the part of Dr.Sunil Kapoor

in treating the patient, Mrs.Laxmi Bai’ be approved.

(xii) It is resolved that the decision of E&MPC to refer the matter for expert opinion

of a Senior most Gynecologist in Case.No.19/2008 be approved.

(xiii) It is resolved that the decision of E & MPC to issue summons to the

Respondent, the Medical Superintendent, Heritage Hospitals in Case

No.16/2008 be approved.

(xiv) It is resolved that the action taken by E & MPC to direct issuing notices to the

respondents in Case.No.03/2009.

5. TO PERUSE THE FINANCIAL POSITION OF THE COUNCIL AS ON 27-06-2009.

It is also resolved that the Financial Position of the Council as on 27.06.2009 be

noted. It is also resolved that the balance amount in SB Account exceeds Rs.20 Lakhs the

same be deposited in F.D. except an amount of Rs.8 Lakhs to meet day to expenditure.

6. TO CONSIDER PURCHASING TWO PRINTERS TO COMPUTER-3 AND

COMPUTER-4 OF OFFICE OF THE COUNCIL.

It is resolved that the old SAMSUNG Company Printers (2) be replaced with HP

model printers. It is also resolved that usual procedure be observed.

7. TO CONSIDER AND APPROVE THE DECISION TO PURCHASE LAPTOPS BASED

ON TECHNICAL OPINION RECEIVED.

It is resolved that 17 ACER Dual Core Model Laptops be purchased at a cost of

Rs.32,890/- per each piece excluding usual Taxes. It is also resolved that the Secretary be

authorized to enter into Memorandum of Understanding with the supplier as per the approval

obtained from the Chairman and supply the same to the members before 15th July, 2009.

8. TO REVIEW THE LATEST STAGE OF ALIENATION OF LAND TO THE

COUNCIL’S BUILDING.

It is resolved that a representation be submitted to the Minister for Medical

Education to expedite the matter. It is also resolved that a request be made to the present

Director of Health for sending specific recommendations for the allotment of land of APMC so

as to construct the proposed Combined Councils’ Building.


(1) To peruse the direction of Hon’ble High Court in Writ Petition No.10889/2009.

It is resolved that the matter be pursued with the Standing Counsel of APMC to see that

Counter Affidavit be filed in the Hon’ble High Court at an appropriate time.

(2) To Accord Registration to Dr.J.Sai Kavitha as per the decision of the General Body:

It is resolved that Permanent Registration be granted to Dr.J.Sai Kavitha as per the

decision taken earlier in this regard. It is also resolved that the signature and thumb-

impression be obtained through E.Mail. It is also resolved that the concerned Senior Assistant

be given a written warning in order to be more careful in future and to implement the decisions

of the Executive Committee in toto, failing which she deserves for appropriate disciplinary

action. It is further resolved that decision be taken separately on notes submitted by the

Admn.Officer and the Senior Asst.(K) on examination of the same.

(3) To pay the Balance Amount to M/s.Team Engineer Systems Pvt. Ltd., Kukatpally, Hyderabad.

It is resolved that M/s.Team Engineer Systems Pvt., Ltd, Kukatpally, Hyderabad be paid

the balance amount of Rs.89,487/- as they have completed the work of installation of mikes and

demonstration done satisfactorily.

(4) Payment of enhancement of consolidated pay to Smt.L.Madhavi Latha, Assistant:

It is resolved that Smt.L.Madhavi Latha be paid enhanced consolidated pay of Rs.9000/-

w.e.f.01.06.2009.

(5) To sanction notional increment to Smt.D.Varalakshmi in the category of Typist and fixation of pay as Senior Assistant.

It is resolved that Smt.D.Varalakshmi be sanctioned an increment in the selection grade

scale of pay of Typist w.e.f.01.06.2009 under FR 22 (a) (1) in the category of Sr.Assistant.

(6) To review the work of staff of APMC with reference to instructions issued to staff and also to review the in-disciplined trends among few staff members:

It is resolved that instructions be given to the staff members reiterating the stand of the

Council that acts of any staff member be construed as disobedience when any body approaches

Government or higher authority directly without bringing the same to the notice of the

Chairman or Registrar. It is also resolved that suitable disciplinary action be taken as per the

rules governing the disciplinary cases on the erring staff members. It is also resolved that a

draft memo be prepared after consulting the Standing Counsel of APMC and issued to the

members of staff members on obtaining approval of the Chairman. It is also resolved that

strict disciplinary action be initiated against erring staff members who ever is found

disobeying the decisions taken by the Executive Committee or the Chairman, APMC. It is

further resolved that instructions be issued to all the staff members in order to observe proto-

cols whenever, the Chairman, Vice-Chairman, Members of the Council or

Committee or the Registrar enters into the office and such non-observance of protocols be

treated as disobedience and disciplinary action shall follow.

(6) (i) To enhance conveyance allowance to the Staff Members of APMC from Rs.750/- to Rs.1000/-.

It is resolved that the matter be placed before the Finance Committee for its consideration

and submission of a report to the Executive Committee for a decision.

(ii) To provide Housing Loans to staff members of APMC.

It is resolved that a memorandum of understanding be executed with the authorities of

Bank of Baroda, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad in order to provide Housing and other loans to all

eligible employees of the Council. It is also resolved that an undertaking be given on behalf of

Loanee -Employees to the effect that the installment amount be recovered from the salary of

the concerned employee and remitted to the bank, in the event of default by the employee.

(iii) To consider photo scanned on the Registration Certificates issued by the Council:

It is resolved that modalities be worked out for upgrading existing project so as to suit that

scan photo will appear on the Registration Certificate. It is also resolved that one of the system

will be maintained as Server and connected to all systems covered under Registration Project

and LAN be provided. It is also resolved that all registration data such as P.G. Registration,

Change of Address and other changes shall appear in the main server in addition to the

manual corrections done to the Medical Register. It is further resolved that immediate steps be

taken for obtaining technical advice and place a report before the Executive Committee in the

next meeting.

The meeting concluded with vote of thanks to the Chair.

REGISTRAR, Sd/-CHAIRMAN APMC APMC




The Executive Committee meeting of the APMC held on 27-08.2009. Dr.Balbeer

Singh Yadav, Chairman, A.P.Medical Council has presided over the meeting. The

following are present:

1. Dr.Balbeer Singh Yadav Chairman2. Dr.K.L.Sampath Kumar Vice-Chairman3. Dr.Nagalla Kishore Member4. Dr.E.Ravinder Reddy Member 5. Sri K.Satyanarana Murty Secretary

The Chairman has granted leave of absence to Dr.Cipai

Subrahmanyam who has expressed his inability to attend the meeting.

The meeting of the Executive Committee was presided over by

Dr.Balbeer Singh Yadav, Chairman. The Chairman welcomed the

members of Executive Committee. The Chairman directed the Secretary

to take up agenda Items. As per the directions of the Chairman, the

Secretary / Registrar initiated the discussions. Copies of the Minutes of

the Executive Committee dated:01-07-2009, the Minutes of Ethical &

Mal Practices Committee dated:28-07-2009, Order of Hon’ble High Court

dated:13-07-2009, Proceedings of CME Committee dated:27-08-2009,

Lr.No.MCI-23(1)/2009/Med./31378, dated:23-08-2009 received from

Medical Council of India on 26-08-2009 etc. have been made available to

all the members of the Executive Committee.


meeting of the Executive Committee held on 01-07-2009 and the action

taken report on the previous minutes. The members have gone through

the notes provided under this item.


submissions made by the Secretary in this respect, it is decided to

confirm the minutes of the previous meeting of the Executive

Committee held on 01-07-2009.

Then the Executive Committee has perused the statistics

pertaining to the Registrations done during the period of 01-07-2009 –

20-08-2009.

The Executive Committee noted that the Permanent Registrations done

were-964, Duplicate of Permanent Registration done-4, Provisional

Registration-8, Re-validation of Provisional Registration-

66, Duplicate of Provisional Registration-1, Registration of Additional

Qualification-391, Change of Name-4, No Objection Certificates-32, State

Good Standing Certificates-35, Applications forwarded to MCI for issuing

Good Standing Certificates-11, CT Forms/Verification Forms Issued-5,

Temporary Permission for Foreign Visiting Doctors-3, Identity Cards

issued were-491.


next item on the agenda, report of the Ethical & Mal-Practices


Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee has considered the following cases:

(i) Case.No.08/2008: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee noted that

the Executive Committee in the meeting held on 01.07.2009 has taken

into consideration of the fact that the Respondent stated that ‘they

could not record the resuscitative measures as they were very hurry to

save the patient and shifted the patient to another hospital and

meantime the patients attendants threatened the nursing staff and

taken away the case sheet without any permission’, it has been decided

that the Respondent Dr.Thumu Rama Krishna be warned for not

maintaining proper records.

(ii) Case.No.22/2008: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee resolved that

the statement of the complainant, Sri T.Sambi Reddy be on record.

(iii) Case.No.17/2008: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee resolved that

the statement of the complainant, Sri Kalluri Adinarayana be on record.

(iv) Case.No.18/2008: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee after taking

into consideration of the entire material on record, it has been noted

that the complainant, Sri M.G.Ramulu Yadav was present alongwith his

Counsel and submitted an application requesting the Council to permit

withdrawal of his complaint on the ground that the originals of xerox

copies enclosed to his complaint are missing and not traceable despite

of all his sincere efforts. The Committee also noted his further statement

that the politicians have developed grudge over Dr.M.V.V.Reddy and

misguided him. The complainant has also stated that in the present

circumstances and after careful consideration of Legal Opinion, he felt it

necessary to seek the Council’s permission for withdrawal of his

complaint, which is pending for an enquiry stating that he is withdrawing

his complaint made against Dr.M.Vishnu Vardhan Reddy.

After taking into consideration of the statement made by the

respondent, Dr.M.Vishnu Vardhan Reddy, wherein he has denied the

allegations made against him and the application of the complaint

stating that he is withdrawing the complaint. It is decided that if he is

found henceforth practising as Orthopedic Surgeon, action will be

contemplated. It is also decided that the observation of the Executive

Committee will be taken into consideration and the name of

respondent’s hospital to carryout joint inspection by CME Committee,

Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee and Legal & Anti-Quackery

Committee will be included at an appropriate time.

(v) Case.No.20/2008: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee after taking

into consideration of statements made by the parties before the

Committee on 26.06.2009, it has been resolved that the matter be kept

in abeyance. It is also resolved that both the parties be addressed in this

regard.

(vi) Case.No.21/2008: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee, taking into

consideration of the claims and counter-claims of both parties need to

be examined, it has been decided that the matter be kept in abeyance.

It is also resolved that summons be issued to Dr.Murali Mohan to appear

before the Committee in the next meeting.

(vii) Case.No.19/2008: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee has decided

to issue summons to the complainant, Smt. Krishnapatnam Sarada to

appear before the Committee in the next meeting.

(viii) Case.No.02/2008: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee noted that

as per the earlier decision on the complaint made against Dr.Y.Savitha

Devi, Swapna Nursing Home, Hyderabad, the matter has been referred

to Dr.Gowthami, Paed. Cardiologist, for her expert opinion and the same

is awaited.

(ix) Case.No.07/2008: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee noted that

as per the earlier decision in this regard, the complaint made against

Dr.Ajit Vigg, Hyderabad along with other material on record were

furnished to three experts, one Senior Pulmonologist, one Senior

Radiologist and one Senior Pathologist. The Committee noted that the

Expert opinion of Three-man expert Committee is awaited.

(x) Case.No.16/2008: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee noted that

inspite of issuing notices on the complaint made by Smt.M.Uma Devi,

Hyderabad, the Respondent i.e the Medical Superintendent, Heritage

Hospital, Hyderabad did not respond to the same. It has been decided to

issue summons to the respondent directing him to appear before the

Committee in the next meeting.

(xi) Case.No.01/2009: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee noted that

the Complainant Sri K.Prasad did not appear before the Committee

inspite of summons issued in this regard and as such it has been

decided to issue summons to him to appear before the Committee in the

next meeting. The Committee noted that the Respondent, Dr.Srinivas

Bathini, Ongole has been present and his statement is on record.

(xii) Case.No.02/2009: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee noted that

the Complainant has been present and his statement is on record. The

Committee noted that the Counsel for the Respondent, Sri V.S.Sudhakar

has been present and filed an application to the effect that Dr.P.B.Arnold

is not doing well and has been advised for bed-rest for 6 weeks and also

submitted a Medical Certificate and prayed to postpone the matter for

hearing for a period of six weeks. After taking into consideration of the

application filed on behalf of the respondent and the Medical Certificate,

it has been decided to direct him to appear before the Committee in the

next meeting.

(xiii) Case.No.03/2009: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee noted that

the complainant Md.Reyaz Pasha did not appear before the Committee

and the respondents who were present along with their Counsel have

expressed the view that it would be appropriate to take their statements

after recording the statement of Complainant. In view of this, it is

decided that summons be issued to the parties concerned to appear

before the Committee in the next meeting.

(xiv) Case.No.04/2009: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee noted that

Sri Bunga Krishna Murthy made a complaint against Dr.T.Krishna,

Akividu for his negligence in conducting Cataract Operation to him. The

Committee noted that a registered notice has been sent to the

Respondent Dr.T.Krishna, Akividu and the same has been re-directed by

the postal authorities to Shankar Netralayam, Visakhapatnam and the

same has been returned un-served with an endorsement that the

addressee was not available there. It is decided to request the

Complainant to find out the present address of the Respondent so that

Regd. Notice be issued to him

(xv) Case.No.08/2009: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee noted that

the complainant Sri Kotla Raju made a complaint against Dr.G.Indira and

others of SVS Hospital, M.B.Nagar. It is decided to issue summons to the

parties concerned to appear before the Committee in the next meeting.

(xvi) Case.No.09/2009: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee noted that

the complainant Sri T.Obi Reddy made a complaint against

Dr.S.Narsimhulu, Tadipatri alleging that the respondent has issued false

Medical Certificate. It is decided to issue summons to both the parties to

appear before the Committee in the next meeting.

(xvii)Case No.23/2008: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee noted that

the Hon’ble High Court granted stay on the orders passed by the III

Senior Civil Judge, CCC, Sec’bad, dt: 04.07.2008. In view of Stay granted

by the Hon’ble High Court, it is decided that the Complaint against

Dr.V.Sreeramulu be kept in abeyance until receipt of further orders from

Hon’ble High Court in this regard.


observations/ recommendations of the Ethical & Mal Practices Committee in

Case No.18/2008, i.e. the complaint made by Sri M.G.Ramulu Yadav against

Dr.M.Vishnu Vardhan Reddy, the Executive Committee has decided to approve

the recommendation of E&MPC and the application filed by the Complainant,

Sri M.G.Ramulu Yadav to withdraw his complaint. It is also decided that if

Dr.M.V.V.Reddy is found henceforth practising as Orthopedic Surgeon, action

will be contemplated. It is also decided that the name of respondent’s hospital

to carryout joint inspection by CME Committee, Ethical & Mal-Practices

Committee and Legal & Anti-Quackery Committee will be included at an

appropriate time.

The Executive Committee decided to approve the action taken by

the Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee in all other cases including that of

‘keeping abeyance of the complaint made against Dr.S.V.Adinarayana

Rao, Visakhapatnam’ and ‘the proceedings initiated against

Dr.V.Sriramulu as per the orders of III Senior Civil Judge, CCC, Sec’bad,

dt:04.07.2008, in view of stay granted by the Hon’ble High Court until

receipt of further orders of the Hon’ble High Court.


next item on the Agenda, i.e. to peruse the financial position of the

Council as on 25-08-2009. The members have gone through the

statement provided under this item and the statement wherein it has

been indicated that the Fixed Deposits in various banks was

Rs.4,29,75,000/- and balance available in S.B. Accounts of Andhra Bank,

SBI(General account), SBI (CME Account) and SBH comes to

Rs.30,55,448/- whereas the balance available in Andhra Bank was

Rs.26,03,099/- and it has been decided to put an amount of Rs.25 Lakhs

in any Nationalised Bank as per the approval of the Chairman as and

when the available balance in S.B. account comes to Rs.33 Lakhs.

Then the Executive Committee has considered the next item on the

Agenda, ‘to consider enhancement of sitting fee to the members for

attending Council/Committee meetings.

The Secretary informed the members of the Executive Committee

that as per the earlier decision in regard, the matter has been referred

to the Chairman, Finance Committee for his approval and subject to

ratification by the Finance Committee. The Secretary has informed that

the Chairman, Finance Committee desired that the meeting of the

Finance Committee will be convened for its consideration and

submission of a report to the Executive Committee for its decision.


Agenda, ‘to consider enhancement of sitting fee to the members of the

Council for attending Internees Ethics Awareness programmes

conducting in various Medical Colleges in the state.


that as per the earlier decision in the regard, the matter has been

referred to the Chairman, Finance Committee for his decision and

subject to ratification by the Finance Committee. The Secretary has

informed that the Chairman, Finance Committee desired that the

meeting of the Finance Committee will be convened for its consideration

and submission of a report to the Executive Committee for its decision.


Agenda, ‘to consider enhancement of Conveyance Allowance to the staff

of the Council from Rs.750/- to Rs.1,000/- and to the Registrar, APMC.


that as per the earlier decision in this regard, the matter has been

referred to the Chairman, Finance Committee for his decision and

subject to ratification by the Finance Committee. The Secretary has

informed that the Chairman, Finance Committee desired that the

meeting of the Finance Committee will be convened for its consideration

and submission of a report to the Executive Committee for its decision.

Then the Executive Committee has taken up for consideration of Addl.

Agenda under this item, the EC has gone through the notice received

from the Hon’ble High Court dt: 30.07.2009 in W.P.No.15440 of 2009.

The members have noted that the Hon’ble High Court on 30 th July, 2009

directed to produce before it, all records and others touching the

proceedings of APMC issued in its Lr.No.26/APMC/PG.Regn.Ven./2009,

dt:15.07.2009 before 01.09.2009. The Executive Committee perused the

clarification received from the Medical Council India in its Lr.No.MCI-

23(1)/2009/Med./31378, dt:23.08.2009 on the subject of Registration of

Addl. Qualification of M.D(Ven.) awarded by colleges recognized by

Medical Council of India in Andhra Pradesh. The members have also

noted that the Post Graduate Committee of MCI observed that the

General Body of the Council at its meeting held on 18.02.2006 had

approved the recommendations of the Post Graduate Committee.

The Members have also noted the said recommendations of the

Post Graduate Committee as below:

“ The Post Graduate Committee considered the matter together with

W.P. No.3372/2005 – Dr.B.Naravana Reddy and 28 others – Vs. – The

Medical Council of India & Ors. In the High Court of A.P. at Hyderabad

and decided to recommend that MD (Derm.) / MD (Ven.)/ MD (Derm,

Ven.) be treated at par with the combined specialty i.e. M.D.

Dermatology, Venereology, Leprosy.”

The Executive Committee also noted that the MCI has clarified

that the qualification of MD (Dermatology, Venereology and Leprosy)

has been included in the Schedules to the I.M.C. Act, 1956 and this

qualification of MD (Dermatology, Venereology and Leprosy)

comprehensively covers all the three branches i.e. Dermatology,

Venereology and Leprosy. The Executive Committee further noted that it

was also clarified that the above cited decision covered the qualification

awarded the nomenclature of Dermatology and Venereology.

The Executive Committee has also noted that the MCI in its above

said letter has made it clear that “In view of above and after due

deliberations, the members of the Postgraduate Committee decided that

the qualification of MD (Venereology) is also covered in the above cited

decision and it should be treated as par with the combined specialty as

is being done for the candidates having MD (Dermatology)

qualification”.

In view of the clarification given by the Medical Council of India in

its letter referred to above, it is decided to furnish the entire material

together with the clarification given by the Medical Council of India to

the Standing Counsel of APMC for filing the same before the Hon’ble

High Court before 01.09.2009 and to submit to the Hon’ble Court that

the impugned proceedings dt:15.07.2009 are to be with drawn and as

such the Hon’ble High Court be prayed for appropriate orders.

The Executive Committee perused the Interim Order of the

Hon’ble High Court dt:30.07.2009 wherein the Hon’ble Court has

considered the W.P.M.P.No.20274 of 2009 in W.P.No.15440 of 2009 filed

by Dr.B.Raghavendra Rao who was one among thirty (30) doctors to

whom registered notices were issued directing them to surrender their

certificate of registration of additional qualification granted to them for

their MD (Venereology) qualification.

The Executive Committee has noted that the General Body in its

meeting held on 31.03.2009 has resolved to recommend to Medical

Council of India for grant of recognition to MD (Venereology)

qualification.

In view of the above resolution passed by the General Body of

APMC at its meeting held on 30.03.2009 and taking into consideration of

clarification received from MCI, it is decided to write a letter to the

Standing Counsel of APMC providing him with copy of MCI Letter

dt:23.08.2009 for further action to file counter affidavit in Hon’ble High

Court. It is also decided to withdraw the decision of the Council to keep

registration of MD (Venereology) in abeyance and also further decided

to send letters to all the candidates (30) who were granted registration

for their MD (Venereology) to that effect. It is also decided to

communicate the copy of letter dt: 23.08.2009 received from MCI to all

the Principals / Deans of Medical Colleges in the State.

It is also decided that the Secretary, APMC be directed to take

necessary steps in this regard.


Agenda, ‘To peruse the interim order dated: 13-07-2009 in WPMP of

2009 in WP No.15440 of 2009. The members have gone through the

notes provided under this item. The members noted that the Hon’ble

High Court on 30th July, 2009 has passed that ‘there shall be interim

suspension as prayed for’ on the impugned proceedings of Andhra

Pradesh Medical Council in its Letter.No.266/APMC/PG/Regn.Ven/2009

dated: 15-07-2009 pending disposal of Writ Petition No.15440 of 2009.

The Executive Committee after taking into consideration of Interim

Orders passed by the Hon’ble High Court and the clarification given by

the Medical Council of India in its Lr.No.MCI-23(1)/2009/Med./31378,

dt:23.08.2009 on the subject of Registration of Addl. Qualification of

M.D(Ven.) awarded by colleges recognized by Medical Council of India in

Andhra Pradesh. The members have also noted that the Post Graduate

Committee of MCI observed that the General Body of the Council at its

meeting held on 18.02.2006 had approved the recommendations of the

Post Graduate Committee.

In view of the above, it is decided to withdraw orders issued in

Lr.No.266/APMC/PG.Regn.Ven./2009, dt: 15.07.2009 and intimate all the

(30) thirty doctors to whom the order has been sent.


next item on the Agenda, i.e. to peruse the order of Division Bench of

Hon’ble High Court in W.P.No.1711 of 2009. The Executive Committee

has gone through the notes provided under this item and noted that as

per the decision taken by the Executive Committee in its earlier

meeting, para wise remarks were furnished to the Standing Counsel in

order to prepare Counter Affidavit on behalf of APMC (4th respondent in

the Writ Petition).

The Executive Committee has also noted that the Hon’ble High

Court on 03.08.2009 has directed the 5th respondent – the District

Collector, Nellore to depute an officer not below the rank of a Joint

Collector to proceed to Kaligiri Town in Nellore District and after causing

a local enquiry by the deputed officer to file a counter by the next date

of hearing as to whether the allegations in the Writ Petition are true and

directed to list the case on 26.08.2009.

The Executive Committee also noted that the proposal made by

the CME Committee for conducting surprise visits / checks by various

small teams with two or three members of the Council / Committees on

hospitals / clinics run by un-qualified persons is finalized the same will

be incorporated in the Counter affidavit to be filed by the Council.

In this regard, members are of the opinion that unless the High

Court directs in this regard or the Government issues notification under

20 (ii) of A.P.Medical Practitioners Registration Act, 1968 and there by

authorizes the Council to inspect the hospitals / clinics run by RMPs /

PMPs and other un-qualified persons. In this regard, the members have

expressed the doubt whether the Council can inspect the premises of

any hospital / dispensary / clinic run by qualified doctors. In this regard,

members have gone through the under the provisions of Section 26 (2)

of Andhra Pradesh Medical Practitioners Registration Act, 1968 and

noted that “In holding enquires under this Act, the Council or its

Committee shall have the same powers as are vested in the civil courts

under the Code of Civil Proceedure, 1908, when trying a suit, in respect

of the following matters, namely:-

a) enforcing the attendance of any person and examining him on

oath;

(b) compelling the production of documents;

(c) issuing of commissions for the examination of witnesses.

The Executive Committee is of the opinion that detailed

examination of provisions of the Act, the rules made thereunder and the

implications of the same are to be ascertained as to whether the Council

or its Committee or the proposed small teams have the power to

inspect the hospitals of any doctors when complaints received such as

(i) hospital is ill-equipped resulting into the death of a patient on

account of in-adequate facilities which are expected to be available in

Hospitals like Super Speciality/Multi Speciality, (ii) doctors are practising

as specialists, such as Orthopedic Surgeons while having primary

medical qualification, (iii) doctors running maternity nursing home by

appointing non-medical practitioners and causing danger to the lives of

pregnant women and sucking the blood of the poor; the doctor is

running an un-authorized dispensary without authorized Gynecologist, if

the Council inspect the said premises, it will be patent on the face of it.

In view of the above, the Executive Committee directed to come

with detailed proposals with all possibilities for conducting joint

inspection by small teams appointed by the Council which shall carry on

inspections in co-ordination with CME Committee, Ethical & Mal-

Practices Committee and Legal & Anti-quackery Committee.

The Executive Committee also decided to place these decisions of

the Council before the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh and also to

the State Government.


next item on the Agenda, i.e. to consider the application of Dr.Pradyut

Waghray for forwarding the same to the Govt. of India for consideration

of “Padma Awards”.

The members have perused the bio-data and the letter submitted

by Dr.Pradyut Waghray for recommendation by APMC for “PADMA

AWARDS”. The members have noted the letter issued by the Chief

Executive Officer, Apollo Hospitals, Hyderabad. The members also gone

through the letter issued by the Secretary, IMA, Hyderabad City Branch,

wherein letters were addressed to the Home Secretary, Govt. of India

recommending the candidature of Dr.Pradyut Waghray for the award of

Padma Shree for the year 2009.

After detailed discussion, it has been decided to address a letter to

the Home Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India forwarding

the bio-data and other material submitted by Dr.Pradyut Waghray.


item on the agenda i.e. minutes of CME Committee held on 27.08.2009.

The members have gone through the various recommendations of CME

Committee. The members have noted that the CME Committee has

recommended considering the issue of conducting CME Programmes

three times in a year in all medical colleges, 1st session in 3rd month, 2nd

session in 9th month and last session in the 12th month of their

Internship. The CME Committee also recommended to conduct

awareness programmes to post-graduate students once in a year. The

CME Committee also recommended to enhance present amount of

Rs.30/- per student to Rs.40/- per student for each session.

The members also noted that the CME Committee has

recommended to conduct the CME Programmes in Districts in

association with IMA and Local Medical Bodies.


recommended to address a letter to IMA/GDA/APNA/Local Medical Bodies

and various associations like APIAP/Surgeons Association/Orthopaedic

Association etc. to co-ordinate the Workshops/Seminars where a booklet

of A.P.Medical Council will be distributed. It has also been recommended

that the financial assistance for conducting the same shall be fixed as

Rs.10,000/-.


recommended to constitute small teams from various committees to

make surprise checks / visits of any hospitals/clinics/nursing homes run

by unqualified persons/RMPs/PMPs in the State to enable to curb the

menace of quackery. It was also recommended to place before the

Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh to the effect that the A.P. Medical

Council is contemplating to conduct surprise checks / visits of any

hospitals/clinics/nursing homes run by unqualified persons/RMPs/PMPs in

the State with a request to give a direction to empower the A.P.Medical

Council to make surprise checks/visits in order to ascertain practice of

Medicine by unqualified persons/RMPs/PMPs/quacks and take effective

steps to curb the menace. The CME Committee has further

recommended to address the Government separately for issuing a

Notification empowering to the Council to make surprise checks/visits in

order to ascertain practice of medicine by unqualified persons

RMPs/PMPs/quacks and take effective steps to curb the menace.

The CME Committee has further recommended that the matter

pertaining to allowing the members to claim actual expenditure incurred

by those members who come on cars.

The Executive Committee after detailed discussion and taking into

consideration of various aspects has decided as follows:

1. To conduct Ethics Awareness Programme only once in a year

taking into consideration of the fact ‘not to disturb the academic

session’. It is also decided to continue the present amount of

Rs.30/- per student for each session.

2. To conduct CME Programmes in Districts in association with IMA

and their local Medical Bodies. To conduct one CME Programmes

at District Level in a year in association with IMA and all other

Medical Bodies. It is also decided to frame guidelines for financial

sanction for CME Programme and also to consider the decision of

the CME Committee @ Rs.25,000/- for one CME at the level of

each district. It is also decided to distribute a booklet which shall

include the Act and functions of Andhra Pradesh Medical Council.

3. The Executive Committee is of the opinion that it is not feasible to

address a letter to IMA/GDA/APNA/Local medial bodies etc. to co-

ordinate the workshops/seminars.

4. The Executive Committee has agreed in principle to the

recommendation of

the CME Committee to constitute small teams from the members

of various committees to make surprise checks/visits of any

hospitals/clinics/nursing homes run by unqualified persons /

RMPs/PMPs in the state to enable the Council to curb the menace

of quackery.


material placed before it, the Executive Committee passed the following

resolutions unanimously.

7. TO CONFIRM THE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING OF THE

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE HELD ON 01-07-2009.

It is resolved that the minutes of the previous meeting of the

Executive Committee held on 01-07-2009 be confirmed.

8. TO PERUSE THE ACTION TAKEN REPORT ON THE MINUTES OF

PREVIOUS MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE.

It is resolved that the Action Taken Report on the Minutes of Previous

meeting of the Executive Committee be approved.

9. TO PERUSE THE STATISTICS RELATING TO REGISTRATIONS

DONE DURING THE PERIOD OF 01-07-2009 – 25-08-2009.

The Statistics relating to the Registrations done during the period

from 01-07-2009 to 20-08-2009 be noted.

10. TO CONSIDER THE REPORT OF THE ETHICAL & MAL-

PRACTICES COMMITTEE DATED 28-07-2009.

(A) It is also resolved that the observations/recommendations of the Ethical

& Mal-Practices Committee dt:28.07.2009 be approved.

(B) (i) In Case No.08/2008, it is resolved that the Respondent, Dr.Thumu

Rama Krishna may also be warned for not maintaining the records in

addition to the decision of the Executive Committee in its earlier

meeting.

(ii) In Case.No.22/2008, it is resolved that the statement of the

Complainant, Sri T.Sambi Reddy be on record.

(iii) In Case.No.17/2008, it is resolved that the statement of the

complainant Sri Kalluri Adinarayana be on record.

(iv) In Case.No.18/2008, it is resolved that if the respondent,

Dr.M.Vishnu Vardhan Reddy is found henceforth practicing as

Orthopaedic Surgeon, action be contemplated against him. It is also

resolved that the name of respondent’s hospital to carry out joint

inspection by various committees be included at an appropriate time.

(v) In Case.No.20/2008, it is resolved that the matter be kept in

abeyance. It is also resolved that both the parties be addressed in this

regard.

(vi) In Case.No.21/2008, it is resolved that the matter be kept in

abeyance. It is also resolved to approve the decision of E&MPC that

summons be issued to Dr.V.Murali Mohan to appear before the

Committee in the next meeting.

(vii) In Case.No.19/2008, it is resolved that the recommendation of

E&MPC to issue summons to the complainant, Smt.Krishnapatnam

Sarada to appear before the Committee in the next meeting.

(viii) In Case.No.02/2008, it is resolved that the decision of E&MPC to

refer the matter pertaining to the complaint against Dr.Y.Savitha Devi to

Dr.Gowthami, Paediatric Cardiologist for her expert opinion be approved.

(ix) In Case.No.07/2008, it is resolved that the decision of E&MPC on the

complaint against Dr.Ajit Vigg to refer to a three men experts committee

be approved.

(x) In Case.No.16/2008, it is resolved that the decision of E&MPC to issue

summons to the respondent, i.e. the Medical Superintendent, Heritage

Hospital, Hyderabad be approved.

(xi) In Case.No.01/2009, it is resolved that the decision of E&MPC to

issue summons to the complainant, Sri K.Prasad be approved.

(xii) In Case.No.02/2009, it is resolved that the decision of E&MPC to

issue summons to the respondent, Dr.P.B.Arnold to appear before the

Committee in its next meeting be approved.

(xiii) In Case.No.03/2009, it is resolved that the decision of E&MPC to

issue summons to the parties concerned be approved.

(xiv) In Case.No.04/2009, it is resolved that the decision of E&MPC to

request the complainant to find out the present address of the

respondent to issue registered notice be approved.

(xv) In Case.No.08/2009, it is resolved that the decision of E&MPC to

issue summons to parties concerned be approved.

(xvi) In Case.No.09/2009, it is resolved that the decision of the E&MPC to

issue summons to both the parties be approved.

(xvii) In Case.No.23/2008, it is resolved that the decision of E&MPC to

stop further proceedings against Dr.V.Sreeramulu in accordance with

the stay granted by the Hon’ble High Court be approved.

5. PERUSE THE FINANCIAL POSITION OF THE COUNCIL AS ON 25-08-

2009.

It is resolved that the Financial Position of the Council as on

25.08.2009 be noted. It is also resolved to put a sum of Rs.25 Lakhs in

Fixed Deposit in any Nationalized Bank as may be approved by the

Chairman, APMC when the balance amount in SB Account of Andhra

Bank reaches to Rs.33 Lakhs.

6. TO CONSIDER ENHANCEMENT OF SITTING FEE TO THE MEMBERS FOR

ATTENDING COUNCIL / COMMITTEE MEETINGS.

It is resolved that the report of the Finance Committee be placed before

the Executive Committee in the next meeting.

7. TO CONSIDER ENHANCEMENT OF SITTING FEE TO THE MEMBERS

OF THE COUNCIL OR ATTENDING INTERNEES ETHICS AWARENESS

PROGRAMMES CONDUCTED IN VARIOUS MEDICAL COLLEGES IN THE

STATE.

It is resolved that the report of the Finance Committee be placed

before the Executive Committee in the next meeting.

8. TO CONSIDER ENHANCEMENT OF CONVEYANCE ALLOWNACE TO

THE STAFF OF THE COUNCIL FROM RS.750/- TO RS.1,000/- AND

TO THE REGISTRAR, APMC.

It is resolved that the report of the Finance Committee be placed

before the Executive Committee in the next meeting.


CHAIRMAN.

1. (a) TO CONSIDER THE NOTICE RECEIVED FROM THE HON’BLE HIGH

COURT DT: 13.07.2009 IN W.P.NO.15440 OF 2009.

It is resolved that the Standing Counsel, APMC be requested to

submit to the Hon’ble High Court that the clarification sought for by

APMC in its letter dated:20-06-2009 has been received from Medical

Council of India through its Letter.No.MCI-23(1)/2009/Med/31378,

dated:23-08-2009 wherein the MCI made it clear that the members of its

Post Graduate Committee had decided that ‘the qualification of M.D.

(Venereology) is also covered in the decision of the General Body of MCI

at its meeting held on 18th February 2006 and it should be treated at

par with the combined speciality as is being done for the candidates

having MD(Dermatology) qualification.’ It is also resolved to withdraw

the impugned proceeding of the Council dated 15-07-2009, and the

Hon’ble Court be prayed for passing appropriate orders.

(b) TO PERUSE THE INTERIM ORDER DT: 13.07.2009 IN

W.P.M.P.NO.20274

OF 2009 IN W.P.NO.15440 OF 2009.

It is resolved that the thirty (30) doctors be informed through

Registered letters that the impugned orders of the Council issued in

Lr.No.266/APMC/PG Reg.Ven/2009, dated:15-07-2009 to keep the

registration of MD (Venereology) in abeyance be withdrawn taking into

consideration of the clarification given by Medical Council of India in its

letter dated 23-08-2009. It is also resolved that the Principals/Deans of

all Medical Colleges in the state and petitioners be communicated the

letter received from the Medical Council of India.

(2) TO PERUSE THE ORDER OF DIVISION BENCH OF HON’BLE HIGH

COURT IN

W.P.NO.1711 OF 2009.

It is resolved that the cases of quacks be referred to the

concerned DIG/SP/Commissioner of Police and to the Collectors for

initiating necessary action as per law. It is also resolved to furnish copy

of Hon’ble Supreme Court order

Dated April 2nd, 1992 against quacks and also enlighten them of the gist

of the Court orders.

(3) TO CONSIDER THE APPLICATION OF DR.PRADYUT WAGHRAY FOR

FORWARDING THE SAME TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA FOR

CONSIDERATION

OF “PADMA AWARDS”.

It is resolved that the Bio-data of Dr.Pradyut Waghray for “PADMA

AWARDS” be forwarded to Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of

India for appropriate action.

(4) TO CONSIDER THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CME

COMMITTEE

HELD ON 27.08.2009 WITH REFERENCE TO WORK OUT

MODALITIES FOR FORMATION OF SMALL TEAMS FOR PURPOSE

OF CONDUCTING SURPRISE VISITS / CHECKS ON THE

HOSPITALS / CLINICS / NURSING HOMES RUN BY UN-QUALIFIED

PERSONS / RMPS / PMPS.

It is resolved that the recommendations of the CME Committee be

approved in Principle.

(i) It is resolved that the present amount of Rs.30/- per student for each

session of Ethics Awareness Programme be continued.

(ii) It is resolved that the CME Programmes in Districts be conducted in

association with IMA and its local bodies. It is also resolved that

Guidelines be prepared for sanctioning the amount of Rs.25,000/- for

CME Programme conducted at each district level. It is also resolved

that a booklet be prepared which shall include the Act and functions

of APMC be distributed.

(iii) It is resolved that the recommendation of CME Committee to address

a letter to IMA/GDA/APNA/Local Bodies etc. in order to co-ordinate the

workshops / seminars would not be desirable.

(iv) It is resolved that the recommendation of CME Committee to

constitute small teams from members of various committees to make

surprise checks/visits of any hospitals/clinics/nursing homes run by

un-qualified persons be approved. It is also resolved that the decision

of Council be placed before the Hon’ble High Court and Govt. of

Andhra Pradesh for appropriate direction in this regard.


Sd/-REGISTRAR, Sd/-CHAIRMANAPMC APMC


AT 03.00 P.M. IN Dr.CHIGURUPATI NAGESWARA RAO COUNCIL’S HALL, HYDERABAD

The Executive Committee meeting of the APMC was held on 22-10-2009. Dr.Balbeer

Singh Yadav, Chairman, A.P.Medical Council has presided over the meeting. The following are

present:

1. Dr.Balbeer Singh Yadav Chairman2. Dr.K.L.Sampath Kumar Vice-Chairman3. Dr.Nagalla Kishore Member4. Dr.E.Ravinder Reddy Member 5. Dr.Cipai Subrahmanyam Member 6. Sri K.Satyanarana Murty Secretary

The meeting of the Executive Committee was presided over by Dr.Balbeer

Singh Yadav, Chairman. The Chairman welcomed the members of Executive

Committee. The Chairman directed the Secretary to take up agenda Items. As

per the directions of the Chairman, the Secretary / Registrar initiated the

discussions. Copies of the Minutes of the Executive Committee dated:27-08-

2009, the Minutes of Ethical & Mal Practices Committee dated:08-09-2009 and

the decisions of Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee dated:22-10-2009 order of

Hon’ble High Court dated:08-09-2009, Proceedings of the Finance Committee

dated:15-09-2009, letter received from Karnataka Medical Council have been

made available to all the members of the Executive Committee.





After detailed discussion and taking into consideration of the submissions

made by the Secretary in this respect, it is decided to confirm the minutes of

the previous meeting of the Executive Committee held on 27-08-2009.

Then the Executive Committee has perused the statistics pertaining to the

Registrations done during the period of 21-08-2009 – 16-10-2009.


were-964, Duplicate of Permanent Registration done-4, Provisional

Registration-8, Re-validation of Provisional Registration-

66, Duplicate of Provisional Registration-1, Registration of Additional

Qualification-391, Change of Name-4, No Objection Certificates-32, State

Good Standing Certificates-35, Applications forwarded to MCI for issuing

Good Standing Certificates-11, CT Forms/Verification Forms Issued-5,

Temporary Permission for Foreign Visiting Doctors-3, Identity Cards

issued were-491.


next item on the agenda, report of the Ethical & Mal-Practices


Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee has considered the following cases

and made its observations/recommendations for further consideration of

the Executive Committee and necessary decision.

(i) Case.No.01/2009: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee has

resolved that fresh summons to be issued to the complainant

directing him to appear before the Committee in the next meeting.

(ii) Case.No.02/2009: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee has

resolved that fresh summons be issued to the respondent.

(iii) Case.No.03/2009: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee has

resolved that the statements of the complainant and respondents be

on record.

(iv) Case.No.08/2009: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee has

resolved that the statements of the complainant and the respondents

be on record.

(v) Case.No.09/2009: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee has

resolved that the statement of complainant and Counsel for the

respondent be on record.

(vi) Case.No.16/2009: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee has

resolved that the statements of complainant respondent’s

representative be on record.

(vii) Case.No.19/2009: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee has

resolved that the complainant be given another opportunity to

appear before the Committee.

(viii) Case.No.17/2008: Complaint made by Sri Kalluri Adinarayana

against Dr.G.Subba Rao, Bhoosaiah Memorial Nursing Home,

Yedlapadu, Guntur District.

The Executive Committee has gone through the detailed

observations/recommendations of the Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee in

this case and noted that “the complainant Sri Kalluri Adinarayana made a

complaint against Dr.G.Subba Rao, Bhoosaiah Memorial Nursing Home,

Yedlapadu, Guntur District.

The Complainant in his complaint dated 09-09-2008 has alleged that

Dr.Garikapati Subba Rao (MBBS) is running Bhoosaiah Memorial Nursing Home

and practising for the last 30 years and in his hands number of patients died

and stated that he has evidence to that effect. He alleged that his wife, Smt.

Kalluri Subbayamma is one among them. He further alleged that having

noticed the corrupt practices of the said doctor, such as selling medicines

without any license and earning lakhs of rupees and the same has been

complained to Commercial Tax Department.

The complainant has further alleged that as per G.O.No.135, there are

certain standards to be observed. There are no trained Nurses or

Compounders and the names of persons who are working as Compounders

have been furnished to the DM&HO. X-Ray Machine is there and has been in

use but for the past several years there had been no qualified paramedical

staff. Scanning Machine is there and Scanning has been done by the doctor for

several patients. The Respondent has permitted Sri Atukuri Mallikharjuna Rao

to run Medical Shop and there is no Pharmacist. The Complainant has further

contended that the Respondent is dispensing medicines without proper

accounts and records and the complainant is having sufficient evidence to

prove the same. A complaint was also lodged before the Vigilance &

Enforcement department and the same have been sent to the DM & HO for

enquiry. The Complainant has requested to conduct an enquiry against the

respondent doctor and to take appropriate action. As per the decision taken in

this regard, in this office Lr.dated 02-12-2008, the complainant was requested

to file his complaint in the form of an affidavit as per Rule-6 of APMC Rules,

1978. Accordingly, he submitted the same complaint duly attested by the

Tahsildar, Edlapadu on 12-12-2008 and another on 15-12-2008. In this office

letter 02-12-2008, the respondent, Dr.Garikapati Subba Rao was requested to

submit his detailed explanation on the allegations made against him. The

Respondent in his reply affidavit has stated that he is running the Nursing

Home at Edlapadu. He has also stated that the allegation with regard to the

death of Kalluri Subbayamma wife of the complainant, it is totally false and

concocted for the purpose of blackmailing him thereby to get huge amounts

from him. He has also stated that Smt. Kalluri Subbayamma was died at

St.Joseph’s Hospital, Guntur on 19.10.2007 but not in his nursing home as

alleged.

He has stated that his Nursing Home is situated at a corner of a village

and the medical shops in the village are at far away place to his nursing home

and in these circumstances, he faced lot of problems in the course of

treatment and hence dispensed the required drugs to his patients only. He

has contended that as a doctor, he is exempted from taking drug license as

per the provisions of Drugs and Cosmetics Act and Rules, u/s K (5) of the Act

to dispense the drugs to his patients and as such he never violated any rules

or laws for the time being in force.

As to the further allegation, he has stated that he has paid Turn Over Tax

to CTO Chilakaluripeta under protest. He has contended that he has dispensed

the medicines to his patients only on no profit – no loss basis, as per the

direction of the CTO, Chilakaluripeta he has paid Rs.34,860/- whereas the

actual tax was only Rs.12,866/- for four years. He contended that the

authorities never alleged “theft of energy” or “tampering with meter. As to the

further allegations with regard to G.O.Ms.No.135, he has stated that the

registration of nursing homes in Guntur District is still going on and several

Nursing Homes in the District are yet to be registered. The District Authorities

insisted the doctors few months back to get their Nursing Homes registered

and accordingly the respondent has applied for Registration of his Nursing

Home also. He contended that he is not at fault. The respondent has stated

that the complainant is harassing and threatening the officers to take action

against him though there is no fault from his side. He contended that the

complainant is a habitual petition-monger.

The respondent contended that the complainant has simply avoided

facing the Enquiry Officer and willfully abstained and leveling allegations

against the DM&HO. He has also contended that the contents of complaint will

prove his habit of blaming each and every official and it carries a reflection of

his Psychological state of mind. With regard to the allegation about the nurses

and compounders he has stated that his nursing home is small one and he is

only a graduate. Majority of the patients will go either to Guntur or to

Chilakaluripeta. He has stated that he personally attend those few patients

who will come to him. The income is meager. Trained nurses and

compounders are not readily available as his income is small and the village is

small. He has stated that he has engaged one MPHW and still in search of

qualified person and three women possessing GNM qualification will come to

work in his Nursing Home from January, 2009. He contended that they will

assist him but won’t extend their services to the patients. With regard to the

X-Ray Plant, he has stated that the same is run by an independent technician

and he is a qualified one. He is running his Laboratory in a room taken on

rental basis and the respondent is not concerned with the same. With regard

to Ultra Sound Scanning machine, he has stated that he is qualified and

obtained permission from DM&HO, Guntur as required under law. He has

stated that he is not concerned with the Medical Shop and the Medical Shop

owner obtained Drug License from the concerned Inspector of Drugs and is

running the shop independently.

With regard to the press clipping of Andhra Jyothi dated 15-09-2008, he

has stated that the allegation is totally false and he never used to draw blood

in his nursing home. He contended that the paper clipping and the photo goes

to show that it was snapped un-noticedly without anybody’s permission. The

picture in the photograph is the laboratory of Dodda Mohan Gandhi who is

owner of it. The X-ray plant can also be seen in the photograph and the

respondent is not concerned with the laboratory and its maintenance. He has

further stated that he came to know that no drawal of blood took place as

alleged and the technician Mohan Gandhi stated that whenever a patient is

unable to step on to the table for X-ray, somebody will help him; this

photograph was taken on such one occasion with a malafide intention,

perhaps by the complainant himself. The respondent stated that the said

Guduri Koteswaramma was not his patient and she was never admitted in his

nursing home as alleged. He contended that the entire story was concocted by

the complainant with the help of the Reporter of the Andhra Jyothi, who is

none other than his relative.

As per the decision taken in this regard, summons were issued to both

parties to appear before the Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee on 26-06-

2009. The Complainant in his letters Dated:15-6-2009 has furnished copies of

certain documents and informed about his inability to appear for hearing in

view of his ill health. In the statement made by respondent, Dr.G.Subba Rao

made the following averments.

1. Since how many years you are practising in the village?

Ans: Since 30 years in Edlapadu Village.

2. Whether this patient died in your hospital?

Ans: No; the allegation is not true.

3. With what complaints, the patient came to your hospital?

Ans: Vomiting, Loose motions and Fever.

4. Are you practising with un-ethical methods?

Ans: No; I have not indulged in any un-ethical methods as alleged by the

complainant.

5. Is it true that you are indicted by the inspecting authorities?

Ans. No.

6. Whether the Drug Inspector has inspected your Nursing Home?

Ans. Yes. The Inspector of Drugs inspected my Hospital in response to the

Complaint given by Sri T.Adinarayana.

7. What is the report of the Drug Inspector after the inspection of your

Nursing Home?

Ans. The Drug Inspector inspected my Dispensary and searched for more

than six hours and no spurious drugs were found. He took samples of

some drugs for sending the same for analysis and the report says that

they are standard drugs.

8. Whether you avoided payment of Profession Tax and other taxes

payable

to Government, thereby causing loss to the exchequer?

Ans. No; the allegation in this regard is baseless and also intended to defame

me. I submit that I am regularly paying Profession Tax, Income Tax and

other Taxes as per the demand notices received in this regard.

9. Whether the DM&HO inspected your Nursing Home? What are his

remarks?

Ans. Yes; The District Medical & Health Officer inspected my Nursing Home

on 06.09.2008. The DM&HO has informed about the recent legislation

that all Nursing Homes and Clinical Establishments shall be registered

and directed us to get registered under the Act.

10. Have you registered your Nursing Home under the recent Private

Nursing Homes and Clinical Establishments Act?

Ans. Yes; photo copy of Certificate of Registration is submitted herewith. Sd/-DR.GARIKAPATI SUBBA RAO

The Executive Committee noted that the complainant, Sri Kalluri

Adinarayana Rao appeared before E&MPC on 28.07.2009 and his statement is

on record.

The Executive Committee has further noted that the Ethical & Mal Practices

Committee has made following observations/recommendations:

(i) There is no negligence on the part of the Respondent Dr.G.Subba Rao

in treating the patient.

(ii) After going through the record, it is evident that the respondent has

referred the patient to higher centre.

(iii) The death has not occurred in the Hospital of the Respondent.

(iv) The Respondent is a qualified person.

(v) The Respondent has not preserved or prescribed spurious medicines;

the report of the Drug Inspector in this regard makes it clear.

(vi) The Respondent has got his nursing home registered under Clinical

Establishment Act and as per the evidence produced by him in this

regard, it is clear that the Respondent has not violated the guidelines

issued by the State Government in G.O.Ms.No.135.

The Executive Committee has also noted that in view of the above

observations and in view of the fact that the Respondent has not indulged in

any un-ethical act as alleged by the Complainant Sri Kalluri Adinarayana, the

Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee concluded that the allegations made by the

Complainant are not proved. The Executive Committee noted that the E&MPC

recommended to the Executive Committee for necessary decision in this

regard. The Executive Committee has gone through the following resolution of

the E&MPC “it is resolved that there is no negligence on the part of

respondent Dr.Garikapati Subba Rao in treating the patient, Smt.Kalluri

Subbayamma since the respondent is a qualified doctor and referred the

patient to Higher Centre when it became necessary and death has also not

occurred in his hospital. It is also resolved that the respondent did not indulge

in any un-ethical act as he has not used any spurious medicines as per the

certificate issued by Drug Inspector and his Nursing Home has got registered

under the clinical establishment Act”.

The Executive Committee after taking into consideration of the material

placed before it and on perusal of the observations / recommendation of

Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee and after detailed discussion has decided

to approve the observations/recommendations of E&MPC. It is decided that

there is no negligence on the part of respondent Dr.Subba Rao in treating the

patient. It is also decided that the respondent has not indulged in any un-

ethical act as he has not preserved or prescribed spurious medicines. It is also

decided that the respondent has not violated the guidelines issued by the

State Government in G.O.Ms.No.135.

(ix) Case.No.20/2008: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee has

resolved that the response from the complainant and the respondent

be awaited.

(x) Case.No.21/2008: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee has

resolved that the telegraphic orders of the Hon’ble High Court to stop

further proceedings against Dr.V.Murali Mohan be noted.

(xi) Case.No.02/2008: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee has

resolved that the expert opinion of Paediatric Cardiologist

Dr.Gowthami be awaited.

(xii) Case.No.07/2008: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee has

resolved that the expert opinion of three men expert committee be

awaited.

(xiii) Case.No.22/2008: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee resolved

that the

application of the complainant to supply certified copies of

documents be deferred until the enquiry is completed treating the

matter sub-judice. The E&MPC also resolved to refer the matter to a

Senior Cardiologist and Prof. & HOD of Neurology Dept of OMC/GMC

for their expert opinion in this regard.

(xiv) Case.No.04/2009: The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee resolved

that the

complainant be asked to find out he address of the respondent,

Dr.T.Krishna to

enable the Council to serve the Registered notice on him. It is also

resolved to

find other ways to serve the Registered Notice on the respondent.

The Executive Committee also noted that in Case.No.15/2009, the

Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee resolved that the matter be referred to the

Standing Counsel so as to ascertain whether the Council is competent to take

action against a doctor who was convicted by Hon’ble High Court in the year

1999. The Executive Committee also noted that the E&MPC resolved that the

complainant’s affidavit be awaited on the allegations made in Para-3 of the

Regd.Notice, dt: 29.07.2009.


E&MPC has resolved that Registered Notice be issued to the respondents,

Dr.G.V.Jagadamba and M.Bharathi.


E&MPC has resolved that registered notice be issued to the respondent calling

for his detailed explanation.


E&MPC has resolved that registered notice be issued to the respondents

calling for their detailed explanation.


E&MPC has resolved that the Medical Superintendent, SVS Hospital,

Mahaboobnagar be requested to furnish more details and relevant records. In

this case it was also resolved to ascertain whether the respondent Dr.K.Sarala

got her Permanent Registration in APMC or not.

After taking into consideration of the observations/recommendations of

the Ethical & Mal Practices Committee and the explanations given by the

Secretary, it is decided to approve the observations/recommendations of the

Ethical & Mal Practices Committee in Cases No.01/2009, 02/2009, 03/2009,

08/2009, 09/2009, Cases No.16/2008, 19/2008, 20/2008, 21/2008, 02/2008,

07/2008, 22/2008 and 04/2009.

The Executive Committee also approved the decisions taken by the

Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee to refer the matter to the Standing Counsel

in Case.No.15/2009 and issuing notices to the respondents in

Case.No.16/2009, 17/2009 and directing the Medical Superintendent, SVS

Hospital, Mahaboobnagar to furnish more details and relevant records.


next item on the agenda i.e. “to peruse the Financial Position of the Council as

on 16.10.2009”.

The Members have gone through the details given in the statement and

noted that the amount in TDRs/FDRs was Rs.4,29,75,000/- and the balance in

S.B. Accounts of AB, SBI, SBI(CME A/c), SBH was Rs.34,10,330/- and the total

amount in various Banks in city was Rs.4,63,85,330/- as on 16.10.2009.


next item on the agenda i.e. to consider the report of the Finance Committee

dated: 15.10.2009.

The Members have gone through the report of the Finance Committee

and the notes provided under this item. The members have noted that the

Finance Committee have made the following recommendations:

(1) Payment of sitting fee to the members attending to the meetings of the

Council/Committees: Sitting fee including Local T.A. for members coming from

out station shall be enhanced to Rs.1,500/-. Sitting fee to the members of

Hyderabad City and the Members coming from local areas shall be paid

Rs.1,200/- including Local T.A. Accommodations charges for members coming

from out station shall be paid Rs.800/- apart from the sitting fee, with effect

from 01.10.2009.

(2) Sitting fee to the members of the Council for attending Internees Ethics

Awareness Programmes: “Sitting fee including Local T.A. for members coming

from out station be enhanced to Rs.1,500/-. Sitting fee of Rs.1,200/- including

Local T.A. be paid to the members of Hyderabad City and members of Local

Areas. Accommodation charges for the Members coming from out station be

paid Rs.800/- apart form sitting fee. Sitting fees and accommodation charges

be paid on par with payment of fees to the members attending

Council/Committee meetings and to the members of the Council for attending

Gold Medal awarding functions” with effect from 01.10.2009.

(3) The Conveyance allowance to the staff of the Council be enhanced from

Rs.750/- to Rs.1000/- w.e.f.01.10.2009. No enhancement of conveyance

allowance shall be considered for the coming three years. The Conveyance

Allowance of the Registrar of the Council be enhanced to Rs.5,000/- from

Rs.3,000/- w.e.f.01.10.2009.

(4) Introducing Challan System:- Challans system be introduced

immediately towards payment of Registration Fee and other fee etc. paid to

the Council. Challans System shall be introduced in Andhra Bank, Main Branch

and then extended to other branches of Andhra Bank.

(5) Memorandum of Understanding:- The Finance Committee after taking

into consideration of the need for extending loan facilities to the employees

through Banks subject to the terms of Loanee Bank and recommended to the

Executive Committee accordingly. The Finance Committee approved the

“Memorandum of Understanding” executed by Bank of Baroda, Hyderabad

towards sanction of “Housing Loans” and other loans to the Staff of the

Council.

(6) The Finance Committee recommended that an amount of Rs.25.00

Lakhs be deposited in Andhra Bank as the Bank has come forward to provide

free service for accepting the Challans.

(7) The Finance Committee recommended that Financial Assistance of

Rs.25,000/- be made to the CME programmes sponsored by APMC in the

District Head Quarters Hospital / Medical Colleges / Area Hospitals etc., with

the participation of local IMA Branches and Medical Associations. The Finance

Committee also resolved that a booklet covering the Act and Functions of

APMC and IMC Regulations, 2002 and 2004 relating to Medical Ethics be

distributed.

(8) The Finance Committee with the permission of the Chairman has

considered to appoint Smt.L.Madhavi Latha, Asst. on regular pay scale

attached to the post of Junior Assistant and resolved that Smt.L.Madhavi Latha

be on regular pay scale attached to the post of Junior Assistant

w.e.f.01.10.2009.

The Executive Committee after taking into consideration of the report of

the Finance Committee, the explanations submitted by the Secretary and after

detailed discussion has decided that:

(1) The Executive Committee approved the recommendation of the Finance

Committee to enhance the sitting fee to the members for attending

Council/Committee Meetings and decided that the sitting fee including Local

T.A. for members coming from out station be enhanced to Rs.1,500/-. It is also

decided that sitting fee to the members of Hyderabad City and members from

local areas shall be paid Rs.1,200/- including Local T.A. It is also decided that

accommodation charges for members coming from out station shall be paid

Rs.800/- apart from sitting fee.

(2) The Executive Committee approved the recommendation of the Finance

Committee to enhance the sitting fee to the members of Council for attending

Internees Ethics awareness programmes conducted in various Medical

Colleges in the State and decided that the sitting fee including Local T.A. for

members coming from out station be enhanced to Rs.1,500/-. It is also

decided that accommodation charges for members coming from out station

shall be paid Rs.800/- apart from the sitting fee. It is also decided that sitting

fee to the members from Hyderabad City and members of local area shall be

Rs.1,200/- including Local T.A. It is also decided that sitting fee and

accommodation charges shall be paid to the members of the Council for

attending Gold Medal awarding functions on par with the payment of fees to

the members attending Council/Committee meetings.

In this regard the Executive Committee has taken into consideration of

the request made by Dr.Cipai Subrahmanyam to consider payment of flight

charges for out station members. After detailed discussion, the Executive

Committee directed the Secretary to obtain T.A. Rules followed by NTR

University of Health Sciences and other Government Sectors and the

necessary details and furnish the same to the Executive Committee in its next

meeting.

It is also decided to direct the Secretary to address letters to the

Principals of Government Medical College with regard to the conduction of

Internees Ethics Awareness Programme. It is also directed to write specifically

that the Gold Medal should be given to the student by the member of

A.P.Medical Council only.

(3) With regard to the recommendation of the Finance Committee for

enhancement of conveyance allowance to the staff of the Council and the

Registrar, the Executive Committee after detailed discussion has decided that

the conveyance allowance to the staff of the Council shall be enhance from

Rs.750/- to Rs.1,000/- per month w.e.f.01.10.2009. It is also decided that

conveyance allowance of the Registrar of the Council shall be enhanced from

Rs.3,000/- to Rs.5,000/- per month w.e.f.01.10.2009. It is also decided that

next enhancement of the conveyance allowance to the staff members shall

not be considered for the coming three years.

(4) With regard to the recommendation of the Finance Committee to

introduce Challan System towards payment of registration fee and other fee

etc. to the Council, the Executive Committee decided that the Challans system

shall be introduced immediately towards registration fee and other fee etc., to

the Council. It is decided that the Challan system shall be introduced first in

Andhra Bank, Main Branch, Koti, Hyderabad and then extended to other

branches in the city. It is also decided that Challan system shall be extended

to other branches of Andhra Bank in the State in a phased manner. It is further

decided to request the bank to supply Challan forms free of cost as per the

proforma approved in this regard.

(5) With regard to the recommendation of the Finance Committee on

“Memorandum of Understanding” executed by Bank of Baroda, Hyderabad

towards sanction of Housing Loans and other Loans to the Staff of the Council,

the Executive Committee after detailed discussion has decided that the

Memorandum of Understanding executed by the Bank of Baroda, Hyderabad

shall be approved. With regard to the proposal for giving commitment to the

bank for recovery of Loan Installment from the salary of the Loanee Employee

in the case of default, it is decided to obtain the opinion of the Sanding

Counsel of APMC and the Auditors of the Council.

(6) With regard to the recommendation of the Finance Committee to

deposit an amount of Rs.25.00 Lakhs in Andhra Bank in view of extending free

service of Challan System, it is decided to deposit the amount as per the

sanction accorded by the Chairman.

(7) With regard to the recommendation of CME Committee for sanction of

financial assistance of Rs.25,000/- for conducting CME programme on behalf of

APMC in the District Head Quarters Hospital/Medical Colleges/Area Hospitals,

the Executive Committee after detailed discussion has decided to include the

bigger branches of IMA in conducting CME programmes and also the State

IMA. It is also decided to work out the guidelines for district CME programmes.

It is decided to constitute a Committee to workout the guidelines for

conduction of CME Programmes at District levels with (i) Dr.Balbeersingh

Yadav, Chairman, APMC (ii) Dr.E.Ravinder Reddy, Member, Executive

Committee (iii) Dr.S.Jagan Mohan Rao, Nominated member of CME Committee.

It is also decided that Financial Assistance of Rs.25,000/- shall be made to the

CME Programmes sponsored by APMC in the District Head Quarters

Hospitals/Medical Colleges/Area Hospitals etc., with the participation of State

IMA and Local IMA Branches and Medical Associations. It is also decided that a

booklet covering the Act and Functions of APMC and IMC Regulations,

2002/2004 relating to Medical Ethics shall be distributed.

(8) With regard to the appointment of Smt.L.Madhavi Latha, Asst. on regular

pay scale attached to the post of Junior Assistant, the Executive Committee

after taking into consideration of the recommendation of the Finance

Committee and after detailed discussion, decided that Smt.L.Madhavi Latha

be appointed on regular pay scale attached to the post of Junior Assistant

w.e.f.01.10.2009. It is also decided to direct the Secretary to obtain the

opinion of Standing Counsel with regard to the creating of post as per the

exigencies of work and rule position.


next item of the agenda i.e. to peruse the order of Hon’ble High Court

dt:18.09.2009 in W.P.No.1711/2009. The Members have gone through the

notes provided under this item and noted that the Hon’ble High Court on

18.09.2009 directed the Special Judge on SC/ST Cases, Nellore to cause an

inspection and submit a report. The Executive Committee noted that the

matter has come up for consideration of Hon’ble High Court on 14.10.2009

and the Special Judge has requested for grant of 10 days time to submit his

report. It is decided to wait for further orders of the Hon’ble High Court.

Then the Executive Committee has taken up for consideration of any

other item with the permission of the Chairman.

With the permission of the Chairman, the Secretary has presented the

decisions of the Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee in its meeting held at 09.00

AM on 22.10.2009.


decisions taken by the Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee in its meeting held

on 22.10.2009. The Executive Committee noted that in (A) Case.No.01/2009 –

Complaint made by Sri K.Prasad against Dr.Srinivas Bathini – Ongole, the

Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee resolved that the absence of the

complainant Sri K.Prasad inspite of three notices be noted. It is also resolved

that the respondent Dr.Bathini Srinivas be warned for not maintaining proper

records (case sheet) and non-submission of records to APMC inspite of

insistence. It is further resolved that the respondent be warned for displaying

the degree which he has not yet completed. It is also resolved that the

respondent be warned not to repeat such things in future.

(B) The Executive Committee noted that in Case.No.02/2009, the E&MPC

has resolved that the representation of Counsel for the respondent be

considered and the matter be deferred for the next meeting of E&MPC.

(C ) The Executive Committee noted that in Case.No.15/2009, the E&MPC

has resolved that the statements of complainant and respondent be on record.

(D) The Executive Committee has noted that in Case.No.03/2009, the

complaint made by Md.Reyaz against Dr.Sameer Diwale and

Dr.K.Satyanarayana of Kamineni Hospitals, L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad, the Ethical

& Mal-Practices Committee has resolved that the Additional Affidavit filed by

Dr.Sameer Diwale wherein he has furnished a copy of the expert opinion given

by Dr.B.T.Prasada Rao, Prof. & HOD, CT Surgery, GMC to the Hon’ble

President, District Consumer Forum, R.R.District “that when the serious

medical problem i.e. encephalopathy which is not within the realm of Cardiac

Surgery is identified, shifting the patient to Paediatric ICU constitute ideal and

optimal patient care” be noted. The E&MPC also resolved that there is no

professional negligence on the part of respondent doctors, Dr.Sameer Diwale

and Dr.K.Satyanarayana. It is also resolved that there is no negligence on the

part of treating doctors; nor monitoring aspects and post sequel is because of

the consequent infection which is not connected with the surgery. Further it is

resolved that the managements of Wockhardt Heart Hospital and Kamineni

Hospitals be advised for consideration of refund of 50% of the bill amount

which was borne by the complainant on humanitarian grounds and taking into

consideration of the poor economical condition of the complainant and in view

of the fact that the patient was admitted under Government Scheme of ‘A.P.

CARDIAC SCREENING CHILDREN BELOW 12 YEARS’.

(E) The Executive Committee has noted that in Case.No.08/2009, the

complaint made by Sri Kotla Raju against Dr.Indira, Dr.Shashi Bhushan,

Dr.Umapathi & Dr.Ganesh of SVS Hospital, Mahaboobnagar, the Ethical & Mal-

Practices Committee has resolved that there is definite negligence on the part

of DMO and Anesthesiologist on duty and also vicarious responsibility on the

Professor of Medicine and Professor of Anesthesiology while discharging their

duties. It is resolved to address the Hospital Authorities to ascertain the

doctors who are on duty on 31.05.2009 treated the patient Sri Kotla Sri Rama

Chandrudu. It is resolved for the placing the matter before the General Body

for indicating appropriate punishment against erring doctors.

(F) The Executive Committee has noted that in Case.No.20/2008, the

complaint made by Ms.L.Suvarna against Dr.S.V.Adinarayana Rao,

Visakhapatnam, the Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee has resolved that the

complaint made by L.Suvarna be closed as there is no further complaint from

the complainant regarding this case even after this office Registered letter

No.APMC/DC/015/Case No.20/2008 Dated 02-09-2009.

(G) The Executive Committee has noted that in Case No.21/2008, i.e. the

Complaint made by Dr.B.Ramachandraiah against Dr.P.Chandra Sekhar and

others, the E&MPC has resolved that the legal opinion given by the

Standing Counsel of APMC be noted. It is further resolved that the matter

be kept in abeyance in respect of proceedings initiated against Dr.V.Murali

Mohan Rao until final disposal of W.P.No.18733/2009 by the Hon’ble High

Court. It is also resolved that summons be issued to other respondent

directing her to appear before the E & MPC.

(H) The Executive Committee has noted that in Case No.16/2009, i.e. the

Complaint made against Dr.M.Bharathi and another, the Ethical & Mal

Practices Committee resolved that the Respondents do not fall within the

jurisdiction of A.P.Medical Council as they are non-medical forensic expert. It

is also resolved that the complainant be addressed so that he may represent

the matter before the concerned authorities for redressal of his grievance.

(I) The Executive Committee noted that under any other item with the

permission of the Chairman, the E & MPC has considered the complaint

received against Dr.G.Venugopal Reddy and another, it has been resolved that

foreign qualifications like MD-Physician etc. be mentioned as MBBS since MCI

is conducting screening test for foreign medical graduates after obtaining their

primary medical qualification. It has been further resolved that MCI be

addressed to consider this aspect which will remove the confusion among the

members of medical fraternity as well as general public. It has also been

resolved that Dr.G.Venugopal Reddy and Dr.Sashikanth Reddy be issued

notices to furnish their explanation on the allegations made by IMA Jagtial

Branch through their complaint dated 13-10-2009 addressed to the Hon’ble

Health Minister, Government of Andhra Pradesh.

After taking into consideration of the observations/recommendations of the

Ethical & Mal Practices Committee and the explanations given by the

Secretary, the Executive Committee has decided that:

(A) In case No.01/2009, i.e. the Complaint made by Sri K.Prasad against Dr.

Bathini Srinivas, the observations/recommendations of the Ethical & Mal

Practices Committee be approved in toto. It is decided that the respondent

Dr.Bathini Srinivas be warned for not maintaining proper records(case

sheet)and for non submission of records to A.P.Medical Council inspite of

insistence for the submission of the same. The respondent also be warned for

displaying the degree which he has not yet completed. It is decided that other

part of the recommendation of the E & MPC that ‘the respondent shall also be

warned not to repeat such things in future’ shall be omitted.

(B) In Case No.02/2009, the Executive Committee decided that the

observation of the

E & MPC be approved.

(C) In Case No.15/2009, the Executive Committee decided that the action

taken By E&MPC as suggested by the Standing Counsel for issuing separate

notice to the Respondent as to his conviction by Hon’ble High Court in the

year 1999 be approved.

(D) In Case No.03/2009, the Complaint made by Md. Reyaz against

Dr.Sameer Diwale and Dr.K.Satyanarayana of Kamineni Hospitals,

Hyderabad, the Executive Committee approved the

observations/recommendations of the Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee. It is

decided that the expert opinion of Dr.B.T.Prasada Rao, Professor & HOD,

C.T.Surgery, GMC given to the President, Dist. Consumer Forum, R.R.Dist. that

“when the serious medical problem, i.e. encepilopathy which is not within the

realm of Cardiac Surgery is identified, shifting the patient to Pediatric ICU

constitute ideal and optimal patient care” be taken into consideration. It is

also decided that there is no professional negligence on the part of

Respondent doctors, Dr.Sameer Diwale and Dr.K.Satyanarayana; non-

monitoring aspect and the post sequel is because of the consequent infection

which is not connected with the surgery. With regard to the other suggestion

of the Ethical & Mal Practices Committee ‘that the managements of Wockhardt

Heart Hospital & Kamineni Hospitals be advised for consideration of refund of

50 % of the Bill amount which was borne by the complainant on humanitarian

grounds and taking into consideration of the poor economical condition of the

complainant and in view of the fact that the patient was admitted under

Government scheme of A.P.Cardiac screening children below 12 years’, the

Executive Committee decided that the same shall be omitted.

(E) Case No.08/2009, the Complaint made by Sri Kotla Raju against

Dr.Indira and others of S.V.S. Medical College Hospital, the Executive

Committee while approving the observations of the Ethical & Mal Practices

Committee decided to refer back the case to the Ethical & Mal Practices

Committee for its specific recommendation as to the punishment to be given

to the Respondents.

(F) In case No.20/2008, i.e., the Complaint made by Ms.L.Suvarna against

Dr.S.V.Adinarayana Rao, it is decided to approve the recommendation of the

E & MPC that the complaint be closed as there is no further complaint from the

complainant inspite of registered letter addressed to her.

(G) In Case No.21/2008, i.e., the complaint made Dr.B.Ramachandraiah

against Dr.P.Chandrasekhar and others, it is decided to approve the

recommendation of the E & MPC to issue summons to the other respondent.

After detailed discussion and taking into consideration of the material

placed before it , the Executive Committee passed the following resolutions

unanimously.

1. TO CONFIRM THE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE HELD ON 27-08-2009.

It is resolved that the minutes of the previous meeting of the Executive Committee

held on 27-08-2009 be confirmed.

2. TO PERUSE THE ACTION TAKEN REPORT ON THE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE.

It is resolved that the Action Taken Report on the minutes of previous meeting of the

Executive Committee be approved.

3. TO PERUSE THE STATISTICS RELATING TO REGISTRATIONS DONE DURING THE PERIOD OF 21-08-2009 - 16-10-2009

The statistics relating to the registrations done during the period from 21-08-2009

to 16-10-2009 be noted.

4. TO CONSIDER THE MINUTES OF THE ETHICAL & MAL-PRACTICES

COMMITTEE DATED 08-09-2009.(A) It is resolved that the observations /recommendations of the Ethical & Mal-Practices

Committee dated 08-09-2009 be approved subject to modifications.

(B) (i) In Case No.01/2009,it is resolved that the decision of E & MPC directing the complainant,

Sri K.Prasad to appear before the Committee be approved.

(ii) In Case No.02/2009,it is resolved that the decision of E & MPC to issue fresh summons to

the Respondent, Dr.P.B.Arnold directing him to appear before the Committee be

approved.

(iii) In Case No.03/2009, it is resolved that the statements of the Complainant and the

Respondents be on record. It is further resolved that the decision of the E&MPC for taking

necessary action in the next meeting after going through the entire record be approved.

(iv) In Case No.08/2009, it is resolved that the statements of the Complainant and the

Respondents be on record. It is further resolved that the decision of the E&MPC for taking

necessary action in the next meeting after going through the entire record be approved.

(v) In case No.09/2009, it is resolved that the Statement of the Complainant and the Counsel

for the Respondent be on record. It is also resolved that the decision of the E & MPC for

issuing Summons to the Respondent to appear before the Committee in the next meeting be

approved.

(vi) In Case No.16/2008, it is resolved that the statement of the Complainant and Respondent’s

representative be on record. It is further resolved that the decision of the E & MPC to give

one more opportunity to the Complainant to appear before the Committee along with her

Counsel and to furnish relevant documents be approved.

(vii) In Case No.19/2008, it is resolved that the Telegraphic / Fax Message of the

Complainant’s

husband be noted. It is also resolved that the decision of E & MPC to give another

opportunity to the Complainant to appear before the Committee be approved.

(viii) In Case No.17/2008, it is resolved that there is no negligence on the part of Respondent,

Dr.Garikapati Subba Rao in treating the patient, Smt. Kalluri Subbayamma since the

respondent is a qualified doctor and referred the patient to higher centre when it became

necessary and death was also not occurred in the Hospital of the Respondent. It is also

resolved that the Respondent did not indulge in any un-ethical act as he has not used any

spurious medicines as per the certificate issued by the Drugs Inspector and his Nursing

home has got registered under the Clinical Establishment Act.

(ix) In Case No.20/2008, it is resolved that the decision of E&MPC to wait for the response

from the complainant be approved. It is also resolved that the decision of E&MPC to close

the case if there will be no complaint from the complainant Ms.L.Suvarna be approved. It

is further resolved that the decision of E&MPC that further action will be initiated if any

complaint is received from the complainant be approved.

(x) In Case No.21/2008, it is resolved that the telegraphic orders of the Hon’ble High Court to

stop further proceedings against Dr.V.Murali Mohan be noted. It is also resolved that the

decision of the E & MPC to send copy of entire file to the Standing Counsel of APMC to

ascertain whether the Council can initiate action against doctors in such cases be

approved. It is further resolved that the decision of the E & MPC to request the Standing

Counsel to attend the next meeting of the Committee to assist the Committee to come to

appropriate conclusion in the matter be approved.

(xi) In Case No.02/2008, it is resolved that the Expert opinion of the Paed. Cardiologist,

Dr.Gowthami be awaited.

(xii) In Case No.07/2008, it is resolved that the Expert opinion of the Three-man expert

Committee be awaited.

(xiii) In Case No.22/2008, it is resolved that the decision of E & MPC deferring the request of

the Complainant to supply certified copies of documents until the enquiry is completed be

approved.

(xiv) In Case.No.04/2009, it is resolved that the decision of E&MPC to ask the complainant to

find out the address of the respondent Dr.T.Krishna to enable the Council to serve the

Registered Notice on him be approved. It is also resolved that the decision of E&MPC to

find out other ways to serve the Register Notice

(xv) (a) In Case.No.15/2009, it is resolved that the decision of E&MPC that the matter be

referred to the Standing Counsel so as to ascertain whether the Council is competent to

take action against a doctor who was convicted by the Hon’ble High Court in the year

1999 be approved. It is also resolved that the E&MPC decision to wait for the

complainant’s affidavit on the allegations made in Para-3 of the Registered Notice

dt:29.07.2009 be approved.

(b) In Case.No.16/2009, it is resolved that the decision of E&MPC to issue registered

notices to the respondents Dr.G.V.Jagadambha and M.Bharathi calling for their detailed

explanation be approved.

(c ) In Case.No.17/2009, it is resolved that the decision of E&MPC to issue registered

notice to the respondent Dr.Surender Reddy on the complaint made by Smt.A.Saraswathi

be approved.

(d) In Case.No.18/2009, it is resolved that the decision of E&MPC to issue registered

notices to Dr.Kiran and Dr.Samit Sekhar calling for detailed explanation on the complaint

made by Jaret Sacrey be approved.

(e) In Case.No.19/2009, it is resolved that the decision of E&MPC to request the Medical

Superintendent, SVS Hospital, Mahaboobnagar to furnish more details and relevant

records be approved. It is also resolved that the decision of E&MPC to ascertain whether

the respondent, Dr.K.Sarala got her Permanent Registration in APMC or not be approved.


It is resolved that the Financial Position of the Council as on 16.10.2009 be noted.

6. TO CONSIDER THE REPORT OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE DT: 15.09.2009.

(A) It is resolved that the report of the Finance Committee dt: 15.09.2009 be approved.

(B) (i) It is resolved that the sitting fee including Local T.A. for the Members coming from

out station be enhanced to Rs.1,500/- and accommodation charges of Rs.800/- be paid

apart from sitting fee. It is also resolved that the sitting fee to the members of Hyderabad

City and Members from local areas be paid Rs.1,200/- including Local T.A.. It is further

resolved that the request of Dr.Cipai Subrahmanyam for payment of Flight Charges

towards T.A. for outstation members be examined. It is resolved to direct the Secretary to

obtain T.A. Rules and other details that are followed by NTR University of Health Sciences

and other Government Sectors to furnish the same to the Executive Committee in the next

meeting. It is also resolved that normally Gold Medal to be given at Internees Ethics

Awareness Programme.

(ii) It is resolved that the sitting fee including Local T.A. for members coming from out

station be enhanced to Rs.1,500/- for the Members of the Council for attending Internees

Ethics Awareness Programmes conducted in various Medical Colleges in the State. It is

also resolved that accommodation charges of Rs.800/- be paid to them apart from sitting

fee. It is further resolved that sitting fee of Rs.1,200/- including Local T.A. be paid to the

Members of Hyderabad City and the Members of Local Area. It is also resolved that sitting

fee and accommodation charges be paid to the Members of the Council for attending Gold

Medal Awarding Functions on par with payment of fee for attending Council/Committee

meetings.

It is resolved to direct the Secretary to address letters to the Principals of the

Government Medical Colleges regarding conduction of Internees Ethics Awareness

Programmes. It is further resolved to write specifically that Gold Medal should be given to

the student by the Member of the Council only. It is also resolved that generally Gold

Medal be given at Internees Ethics Awareness Programme.

(iii) It is resolved that the Conveyance Allowance to the Staff of the Council be

enhanced from Rs.750/- to Rs.1,000/- per month w.e.f.01.10.2009. It is also resolved that

the conveyance allowance of the Registrar of the Council shall be enhanced from

Rs.3,000/- to Rs.5,000/- per month w.e.f.01.10.2009. It is also resolved that next

enhancement of conveyance allowance to the staff members shall not be considered for the

coming three years.

(iv) It is resolved that the Challans System be introduced immediately towards payment

of Registration Fee and other Fee etc., to the Council. It is also resolved that the Challan

System shall be introduced first in Andhra Bank, Main Branch and then extended to other

branches in Twin Cities. It is also resolved that the Challan System be extended to other

branches of Andhra Bank in the State in a phased manner. It is further resolved that the

Bank be requested to supply Challan Forms free of cost as per the proforma approved in

this regard.

(v) It is resolved that the Memorandum of Understanding executed by Bank of Baroda,

Hyderabad be approved. It is further resolved to obtain the opinion of the Standing

Counsel of APMC and Auditors of the Council as to giving commitment of recovery of loan

installment from the salary of Loanee Employee in case of default in the payment.

(vi) It is resolved that bigger branches of IMA and also the State IMA be included for

conducting CME Programmes.

(vii) It is also resolved that the guidelines for District CME Programmes be worked out.

It is further resolved that a Committee be constituted with (i) Dr.Balbeer Singh Yadav,

Chairman, APMC, (ii) Dr.E.Ravinder Reddy, Member Executive Committee, (iii)

Dr.S.Jagan Mohan Rao, Nominated Member of CME Committee to work out the guidelines

for conducting CME Programmes at District Levels. It is also resolved that Financial

Assistance of Rs.25,000/- be made to the CME Programmes sponsored by APMC in the

District Head Quarters Hospitals/ Medical Colleges / Area Hospitals etc. with

participation of State IMA and Local IMA Branches and various medical associations. It is

further resolved that a booklet covering the Act and functions of APMC and IMC

Regulations, 2002 / 2004 relating to Medical Ethics be distributed.

(viii) It is resolved that Smt.L.Madhavi Latha be appointed on regular pay scale

attached to the post of Junior Assistant w.e.f.01.10.2009, subject to obtaining the opinion

of the Standing Counsel. It is also resolved that the opinion of the Standing Counsel be

obtained with regard to creating a post as per exigencies of work and rule position.

7. TO PERUSE THE ORDER OF HON’BLE HIGH COURT DT: 18.09.2009 IN W.P.NO.1711/2009.

It is resolved that the Order of Hon’ble High Court dt:18.09.2009 be noted.


CHAIRMAN.

(A) It is resolved that the decisions of Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee

dt:22.10.2009 (09.00 AM) be approved subject to modifications.

(B) (i) In Case.No.01/2009 – Complaint made by Sri K.Prasad against Dr.Srinivas Bathini

– Ongole, it is resolved that the absence of the complainant Sri K.Prasad inspite of three

notices be noted. It is also resolved that the respondent Dr.Bathini Srinivas be warned for

not maintaining proper records (case sheet) and non-submission of records to APMC

inspite of insistence. It is further resolved that the respondent be warned for displaying the

degree which he has not yet completed.

(ii) In Case.No.02/2009, it is resolved that the representation of Counsel for the respondent be

considered and the matter be deferred for the next meeting of E&MPC.

(iii) In Case.No.15/2009, it is resolved that the statements of complainant and respondent be on

record.

(iv) In Case.No.03/2009, i.e. the complaint made by Md.Reyaz against Dr.Sameer Diwale and

Dr.K.Satyanarayana of Kamineni Hospitals, L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad, it is resolved that the

expert opinion given by Dr.B.T.Prasada Rao, Prof. & HOD, CT Surgery, GMC to the

Hon’ble President, District Consumer Forum, R.R.District “that when the serious medical

problem i.e. encephalopathy which is not within the realm of Cardiac Surgery is identified,

shifting the patient to Paediatric ICU constitute ideal and optimal patient care” be noted.

It is also resolved that there is no professional negligence on the part of respondent

doctors, Dr.Sameer Diwale and Dr.K.Satyanarayana. It is also resolved that there is no

negligence on the part of treating doctors; non monitoring aspects and post sequel is

because of the consequent infection which is not connected with the surgery.

(v) It is resolved that in Case.No.08/2009, i.e. the complaint made by Sri Kotla Raju against

Dr.Indira, Dr.Shashi Bhushan, Dr.Umapathi & Dr.Ganesh of SVS Hospital,

Mahaboobnagar, it is resolved that there is definite negligence on the part of DMO and

Anesthesiologist on duty and also vicarious responsibility on the Professor of Medicine

and Professor of Anesthesiology while discharging their duties. It is resolved to address

the Hospital Authorities to ascertain the doctors who are on duty on 31.05.2009 treated the

patient Sri Kotla Sri Rama Chandrudu. It is resolved that the case be referred back to the

Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee for its specific recommendation as to the punishment

to be given to the erring doctors.

(vi) In Case.No.20/2008,i.e. the complaint made by Ms.L.Suvarna against Dr.S.V.Adinarayana

Rao, Visakhapatnam, it is resolved that the complaint made by L.Suvarna be closed as

there is no further complaint from the complainant regarding this case even after this

office Registered letter No.APMC/DC/015/Case No.20/2008 Dated 02-09-2009.

(vii) In Case No.21/2008, i.e. the Complaint made by Dr.B.Ramachandraiah against

Dr.P.Chandra Sekhar and others, it is resolved that the legal opinion given by the Standing

Counsel of APMC be noted. It is further resolved that the matter be kept in abeyance in

respect of proceedings initiated against Dr.V.Murali Mohan Rao until final disposal of

WP No.18733/2009 by the Hon’ble High Court. It is further resolved that the decision of

E&MPC to issue summons to the other respondent directing her to appear before the E &

MPC be approved.

(viii) In Case No.16/2009, i.e. the Complaint made against Dr.M.Bharathi and another, it is

resolved that the Respondents do not fall within the jurisdiction of A.P.Medical Council as

they are non-medical forensic expert. It is also resolved that the decision of E&MPC that

the complainant be addressed so that he may represent the matter before the concerned

authorities for redressal of his grievance be approved.

(ix) It is resolved that the decision of the E&MPC that foreign qualifications like MD-

Physician etc. be mentioned as MBBS since MCI is conducting screening test for foreign

medical graduates after obtaining their primary medical qualification be approved. It is

also resolved that MCI be addressed to consider this aspect which will remove the

confusion among the members of medical fraternity as well as general public. It is also

resolved that the decision of E&MPC to issue notices to Dr.G.Venugopal Reddy and

Dr.Sashikanth Reddy be approved.


REGISTRAR Sd/-CHAIRMANAPMC APMC



AT 03.00 P.M. IN Dr.CHIGURUPATI NAGESWARA RAO COUNCIL’S HALL, HYDERABAD

The Executive Committee meeting of the APMC was held on 26-11-2009. Dr.Balbeer

Singh Yadav, Chairman, A.P.Medical Council has presided over the meeting. The following are

present:

1. Dr.Balbeer Singh Yadav Chairman2. Dr.K.L.Sampath Kumar Vice-Chairman3. Dr.E.Ravinder Reddy Member4. Sri K.Satyanarana Murty Secretary

The meeting of the Executive Committee was presided over by Dr.Balbeer

Singh Yadav, Chairman. The Chairman granted leave of absence to Dr.Nagalla

Kishore and Dr.Cipai Subrahmanyam as they have expressed their inability to

attend the meeting.

The Chairman welcomed the members of Executive Committee. The

Chairman directed the Secretary to take up agenda Items. As per the

directions of the Chairman, the Secretary/Registrar initiated the discussions.

Copies of the Minutes of the Executive Committee dated:22-10-2009 and

others have been made available to all the members of the Executive

Committee.

The Executive Committee has first considered the Minutes of previous




After detailed discussion and taking into consideration of the submissions

made by the Secretary in this respect, it is decided to confirm the minutes of

the previous meeting of the Executive Committee held on 22-10-2009.

Then the Executive Committee has perused the statistics pertaining to the

Registrations done during the period of 17-10-2009 – 21-11-2009.


were-385, Duplicate of Permanent Registration done-Nil, Provisional

Registration-687, Re-validation of Provisional Registration-21,

Duplicate of Provisional Registration-1, Registration of Additional Qualification-

134, Change of Name-4, No Objection Certificates-22, State Good Standing

Certificates-24, Applications forwarded to MCI for issuing Good Standing

Certificates-12, CT Forms/Verification Forms Issued-2, Temporary Permission

for Foreign Visiting Doctors-8, Identity Cards issued were-403.


next item on the agenda, report of the Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee,

Dated 22-11-2009. The Executive Committee noted that the Ethical & Mal-

Practices Committee has met on 22.11.2009. After going through the notes

provided under this item and the details given by the Secretary that Ethical &

Mal-Practices Committee has not made its observations/recommendations but

it has recorded statements of the parties in some cases, it is decided that this

item may be taken for consideration in the next meeting of the Executive

Committee for necessary decisions. In this context, the Secretary brought to

the notice of the Members that in pursuance of the decision taken by the

Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee in its meeting held on 22.10.2009 and

subsequent approval of the Executive Committee, registered notices have

been issued to Dr.G.Venugopal Reddy and Dr.G.Sashikanth Reddy directing

them to submit their explanation on the allegations made against them by the

IMA, Jagtial Branch. The Secretary also explained the members that the

E&MPC in its meeting held on 22.11.2009 has decided to issue summons to

these respondents to appear before the E&MPC in its next meeting to be held

in the last week of December, 2009. In this context, it has been decided that

the qualifications of Foreign Medical Graduates, like MD (Physician) be

mentioned in the Registration Certificates as MD-Physician (Equalant to MBBS)

- ………. University in order to remove confusion among the members of Medical

Fraternity and also the common public. It is also decided that the matter be placed before

the General Body in the meeting to be held on 04.12.2009.

It is also decided to place this matter before the General Body in its next

meeting to be held on 04.12.2009 for necessary decision.


next item on the agenda, i.e. to peruse the Financial Position of the

Council as on 21.11.2009. The Executive Committee noted that the

amount in fixed deposits in various banks was Rs.4,29,75,000/-, the

amount in SB Account of Andhra Bank was Rs.42,12,594/- and an

amount of Rs.7,20,349/- in AB Accounts of SBI & SBH, thus the total

amount in Banks was Rs.4,79,07,928-00. The Secretary has informed

that the amount available in SB account, Andhra Bank is about

Rs.47,12,594/- and a statement is filed.


next item on the agenda, i.e. to peruse the present stage of

W.P.No.1711/2009 before Hon’ble High Court. The Executive Committee

has gone through the notes provided under this item and the details

provided by the Secretary. The Executive Committee noted that the

report of the Special Judge for SC/ST Cases, Nellore was placed before

the Hon’ble High Court and the matter has been adjourned for further

hearing and the Writ Petition has not reached.

With regard to the Writ Petition pending before the Division Bench

of Hon’ble High Court, the Executive Committee has decided to take up

this item as and when the Hon’ble High Court passes its orders in this

regard.

In this context, the Vice Chairman brought to the notice of the

Executive Committee that the Delhi Medical Council Act seems to be

latest one in the County and under this Act, the Delhi Medical Council

has more powers to exercise in order to curb quackery and un-

authorized practice of modern medicine by the practitioners of other

systems of medicine. After detailed discussion, it has been decided to go

through the Delhi Medical Council Act and the Rules made under the Act

available on Delhi Medical Council Website and place the matter before

the Executive Committee in its next meeting.


next item on the agenda, i.e. to ratify the action of the Chairman, APMC

in sanctioning additional D.A. to the staff of the Council as per G.O.

Ms.No.265, Dated:26-10-2009, Finance (PC-I) Department. The

Executive Committee has gone through the notes provided under this

item and noted that the Government of Andhra Pradesh have issued

orders revising the rate of Dearness Allowance to the employees of

State Government from 51.810% to 60.288% w.e.f.1st July, 2009 vide

G.O.Ms.No.265, dt:26.10.2009. The Executive Committee has also noted

that the matter has been placed before the Chairman, Finance

Committee and as per the recommendation made by him, the Chairman,

APMC has accorded sanction for the revision of D.A. from 51.810% to

60.288% w.e.f. 01.07.2009 and for payment of arrears from that date.

After detailed discussion, it has been decided to ratify the action of the

Chairman, APMC in sanctioning the revised D.A. on par with the

employees of State Government w.e.f. 01.07.2009 and for payment of

arrears from that date.


next item on the agenda, i.e. to consider Regularization of the services

of Sri G.Anil Kumar, Junior Assistant. The Members have gone through

the notes provided under this item and noted that Sri G.Anil Kumar,

Junior Assistant was appointed on 30.04.2008 on temporary basis and

consequent on retirement of one of the Junior Assistants on 31.07.2008,

he was appointed on regular pay scale attached to the post of Junior

Assistant w.e.f.01.08.2008. The Members also noted that since then, he

has completed one year service satisfactorily on 31.07.2009. The

Members also noted the details provided by the Secretary, APMC that

hitherto the services of employees of APMC had been regularized after

their completion of one year satisfactory service. Taking into

consideration of the details provided by the Secretary and after detailed

discussion, it has been decided to regularize the services of Sri G.Anil

Kumar, Junior Assistant from the date of his appointment i.e. w.e.f. 01-

08-2008. It has also been decided that Probation of Sri G.Anil Kumar,

Junior Assistant be declared w.e.f. 01-08-2009 as he completed one year

satisfactory service on 31.07.2009.


next item on the agenda, i.e. to consider Regularization of the services

of Sri V.Suresh, Office subordinate. The Members have gone through the

notes provided under this item and noted that Sri V.Suresh, Office

subordinate was appointed on 30.04.2008 on temporary basis and

subsequently, as per sanction accorded by the Executive Committee, he

was appointed on regular pay scale attached to the post of Office

Subordinate in the existing vacancy of Office Subordinate/Driver to the

Registrar w.e.f. 01.08.2008. The Members also noted that since then, he

has completed one year service satisfactorily on 31.07.2009. The

Members also noted the details provided by the Secretary, APMC that

hitherto the services of all the employees of the Council had been

regularized on completion of one year satisfactory service. Taking into

consideration of the details provided by the Secretary and after detailed

discussion, it has been decided to regularize the services of Sri

V.Suresh, Office subordinate from the date of his appointment i.e.

w.e.f.:01-08-2008. It has also been decided that Probation of Sri

V.Suresh, Office subordinate be declared w.e.f. 01-08-2009 as he

completed one year satisfactory service on 31.07.2009.


next item on the agenda, i.e. to consider any other item with the

permission of the Chairman. The Secretary requested the Members to

raise any other item with the permission of the Chairman.

Members have noted that there is urgent need for incorporating

amendments to the A.P.Medical Practitioners Registration Act and the

Rules made thereunder together with making regulations as are

required under the Act. The Secretary explained that the work

pertaining to incorporating amendments to the A.P.Medical Practitioners

Registration Act and the Rules made thereunder together with making

regulations is under consideration and the Standing Counsel and that he

has been in touch in this regard.

After going through the material placed before it and after detailed

discussion, the Executive Committee has passed the following resolutions

unanimously.

4. TO CONFIRM THE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE

COMMITTEE HELD ON 22-10-2009.

It is resolved that the minutes of the previous meeting of the Executive

Committee held on 22.10.2009 be confirmed.

5. TO PERUSE THE ACTION TAKEN REPORT ON THE MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE.

It is resolved that the action taken report on the minutes of previous meeting be

approved.

6. TO PERUSE THE STATISTICS RELATING TO REGISTRATIONS DONE DURING

THE PERIOD OF 17-10-2009 - 21-11-2009.

It is resolved that the statistics relating to the registrations done during the

period from 17.10.2009 to 21.11.2009.

7. TO CONSIDER THE DECISIONS OF ETHICAL & MAL-PRACTICES COMMITTEE DATED: 22-11-2009.

It is resolved that the minutes of the Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee for the

meeting held on 22.11.2009 be taken up for consideration in the next meting of the

Executive Committee. It is also resolved that the qualification MD (Physician be

mentioned in the registration certificate as “MD-Physician (Equivalent to MBBS)

____ University” in order to remove confusion among the members of Medical

Fraternity and also the common public. It is also resolved that the matter be placed

before the General Body in the meeting to be held on 04.12.2009.


It is resolved that the Financial Position of the Council as on 21.11.2009 be

noted.

6. TO PERUSE THE PRESENT STAGE OF W.P.NO.1711/2009 BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT.

(i) It is resolved that the matter be taken up for consideration as and when

Hon’ble High Court passes necessary orders.

(ii) It is also resolved that the information available on Delhi Medical Council

Web-site be downloaded so as to know the powers of the Delhi Medical Council

under its Act, Rules and Regulations in the matters of practice of Modern Medicine

by Quacks and other unauthorized persons. It is further resolved that the same be

placed before the Executive Committee in its next meeting.

7. TO RATIFY THE ACTION OF THE CHAIRMAN, APMC IN SANCTIONING ADDITIONAL D.A. TO THE STAFF OF THE COUNCIL AS PER G.O. MS.NO.265, DATED:26-10-2009, FINANCE (PC-I) DEPARTMENT.

It is resolved that the action taken by the Chairman, APMC in sanctioning

Additional D.A. to the staff of the Council as per the orders issued by the

Government in G.O.Ms.No.265, dt:26.10.2009, Finance (PC-I) Dept., be ratified.

8. TO CONSIDER REGULARISATION OF THE SERVICES OF SRI G.ANIL KUMAR,

JUNIOR ASSISTANT.

It is resolved that the services of Sri G.Anil Kumar, Junior Assistant be

regularized from 01.08.2008. It is also resoled that his probation be declared w.e.f.

01.08.2009 as he completed one year of satisfactory service in the post of Junior

Assistant on that date.

9. TO CONSIDER REGULARISATION OF THE SERVICES OF SRI V.SURESH, OFFICE SUB-ORDINATE.

It is resolved that the services of Sri V.Suresh, Office Subordinate be


01.08.2009 as he completed one year of satisfactory service in the post of Office

Subordinate on that date.


It is resolved that necessary action be taken for incorporating

amendments to the A.P.Medical Practitioners Registration Act and also

the Rules made thereunder together with making regulations as are

required under the Act. The Secretary be directed to pursue the matter

with the Standing Counsel of the Council.


REGISTRAR CHAIRMANAPMC APMC


MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF GENERAL BODY HELD ON 04-12-2009AT 11-30 A.M. IN Dr.CHIGURUPATI NAGESWARA RAO COUNCIL’S HALL,

HYDERABAD.

The General Body meeting of the APMC held on 04.12.2009. Dr.Balbeer

Singh Yadav, Chairman, A.P.Medical Council has presided over the meeting.

The following are present:

1. Dr.Balbeer Singh Yadav Chairman2. Dr.K.L.Sampath Kumar Vice-Chairman3. Dr.V.Ram Prasad Member4. Dr.T.Ravi Raju,


5. Dr.Hanumanlu, Jt.Director Repr. Director of Health

Ex-Officio Member

6. Dr.P.Sucharitha Murthy, Director, Institute of Preventive Medicine

Ex-Officio Member

7. Dr.Cipai Subrahmanyam Member8. Dr.K.Ramesh Reddy Member9. Dr.G.Balamaddaiah Member10.

Dr.Nagalla Kishore Member

11.

Dr.P.Vijaya Chander Reddy Member

12.

Dr.Surapureddy Srinivasa Reddy Member

13.

Dr.Raj Siddharth Member

14.

E.Ravinder Reddy Member

15.

Sri K.Satyanarana Murty Secretary

The Chairman has granted leave of absence to Dr.A.V.Krishnam Raju,

Dr.C.Padmavathi who have expressed their inability to attend the meeting.

The meeting of the General Body was presided over by Dr.Balbeer Singh

Yadav, Chairman. The Chairman welcomed the members of GB and directed

the Secretary to take up agenda Items. As per the directions of the Chairman,

the Secretary/Registrar initiated the discussions. Copies of the proceedings of

the General Body dated:31-03-2009,Copies of the Minutes of meetings of the

Executive Committee dated:20-05-2009, 01-07-2009, 27-08-2009 22-10-2009

& 26-11-2009, the Minutes of the Meetings of the Ethical & Mal-Practices

Committee dated:15-02-2009, 30-04-2009, 26-05-2009, 26-06-2009, 28-07-

2009, 08-09-2009 and 22-10-2009, Report of the CME Committee dated:27-

08-2009 and Report of the Finance Committee dated 15-09-2009 and other

material were circulated to all the members of the Council.

The General Body has first considered the Minutes of previous meeting

of the General Body held on 31-03-2009. The members have gone through the

notes provided under this item together with action taken report. The

members have gone through the action taken report. After detailed discussion

and taking into consideration of the submissions made by the Secretary in this

respect, it is decided to confirm the minutes of the previous meeting of the

General Body held on 31-03-2009.

Then the General Body has taken up for consideration of the next item

on the Agenda, i.e. to consider and approve the minutes of the meetings of

the Executive Committee held on 20-05-2009, 01-07-2009, 27-08-2009, 22-10-

2009 and 26-11-2009. The members have gone through the notes provided

under this item and details provided by the Secretary. After detailed

discussion and taking into consideration of the submissions made by the

Secretary in this respect, it is decided to confirm the minutes of the meetings

of the Executive Committee held on 20-05-2009, 01-07-2009, 27-08-2009, 22-

10-2009 and 26-11-2009.

(A)

(i) The General Body has noted that in the meeting held on 20.05.2009, the

Executive Committee has considered the reports of E&MPC dt:15.02.2009 and

30.04.2009. The members have also noted that the Executive Committee has

approved the observations/recommendations of the E&MPC in

Case.No.23/2007, that the allegations made by Sri B.Venkateswar Reddy are

not proved against Dr.G.Satyanarayana, Dr.B.Ravi Shankar and Dr.N.Eshwar

Chandra and that there was no role of Dr.G.Laxmana Sastry, Dr.S.Radha and

Dr.M.Srinivas as they are participants in the tumour board meeting held on

01.07.2003.

(ii) The General Body has noted that in Case No.09/2006; the Executive

Committee has approved the observations/recommendations of the E&MPC,

that ‘there is no negligence on the part of Dr.C.Narasimhan, Cardiologist in

treating the patient Ms.S.Swathi at Care Hospital, Hyderabad.

(iii) The General Body has noted that the Executive Committee has considered

the decision of Government on the appeal petition filed by Dr.Roya Rozati and

Dr.Salman Saifuddin and that the Government has granted stay on the order

passed by the Council and that the final decision was awaited.

(iv) The General Body has noted that the Executive Committee has considered

other items like perusal of the status of Writ Petitions / Civil Suit pending

before various Courts and considered enhancement of the sitting fees to the

members for attending Council/Committee meetings and members of the

Council attending Internees Ethics Awareness Programmes and the Executive

Committee has decided to refer this item for consideration of the Finance

Committee and for its report. The General Body has also noted that the

Executive Committee has perused the Paper Clippings on Supreme Court in

NIMS’ Case and that the Executive Committee decided that further necessary

action be taken on receipt of full test of the Judgment. The Executive

Committee in the said meeting has considered issuing guidelines on the use of

basic foreign degrees which gives the impression of Post Graduate

Qualification. The members noted that the EC has decided that a circular be

sent to all the branches of IMA with a request to advise all their members to

display the name of the Country next to their qualification in order to remove

confusion among common public.

(v) The Executive Committee also decided that an advise be given to the

doctors having Post-Graduate qualifications to clearly display their specialty in

bracket. So as to avoid confusion in the minds of public so that they can know

the specialty possessed by the doctor. The Executive Committee has also

decided that a brief note be published in IMA Bulletin in this regard.

The General Body after going through the minutes of the Executive

Committee meeting dt:20.05.2009 and after detailed discussion decided that

the minutes of the Executive Committee meeting be approved.

(B)

(i) The General Body has noted that in its meeting held on 01.07.2009, the

Executive Committee has considered the reports of the Ethical & Mal-Practices

Committee dt:26.05.2009 and 26.06.2009.

(ii) The General Body has noted that the Executive Committee has approved

the observations/recommendations of the E&MPC in Case.No.08/2008, that

‘there is no negligence on the part of respondent Dr.Thumu Rama Krishna in

treating the patient Sri Gosu Ananda Rao’. The General Body has also noted

that in the said case the Executive Committee has decided that the

Respondent should be warned not to give vide publicity which will glorify his

personal image. It is further noted that the EC has decided that the

respondent be warned for not maintaining proper records.

(iii) The General Body noted that the Executive Committee has approved the

observations/recommendations of the E&MPC in Case.No.24/2008, that “the

respondent deserves to be warned for his un-ethical acts such as using DNB

(Cardiology) without possessing the same and displaying ‘D Card NIMS’, which

is an un-recognized qualification and admittedly practicing in Karimnagar for

the past five years but got himself registered in APMC for his MBBS as well as

MD (General Medicine) degrees in February, 2009 consequent on receipt of

Registered notice from the Council.

(iv) The General Body has decided to approve the

observations/recommendations of the E&MPC as approved by the Executive

Committee in Case.No.22/2007 that ‘there is no negligence on the part of

Dr.Batchu Radhakrishna in treating the patient B.Prakash’. The General Body

also decided to approve further observations of E&MPC as approved by the

Executive Committee that ‘the objections of the respondent, Dr.Batchu Radha

Krishna are not maintainable in view of APMC Enquiry Rules, 1978’.

(v) The General Body has decided to approve the


Committee in Case.No.12/2008, that ‘there is no negligence on the part of

Dr.P.Aruna in treating the complainant/patient, Mrs.C.Ramalingeswari Devi.

(vi) The General Body has decided to approve the


Committee in Case.No.13/2008 that ‘there was no negligence on the part of

Dr.Sunil Kapoor in treating the patient Mrs.Laxmi Bai.

(vii) The General Body also noted that the Executive Committee has approved

the decision to purchase (17) Laptops @ 32,890/- per each piece excluding

usual taxes based on technical opinion received in this regard. The Executive

Committee has also decided to authorize the Secretary to enter into

Memorandum of Understanding. The Executive Committee also decided that a

representation be submitted to the Minister for Medical Education with regard

to alienation of land to the Council’s Building to expedite the matter. The

Executive Committee further decided that a request be made to the present

Director of Health for sending specific recommendations for the allotment of

land to APMC, so as to construct the proposed Combined Councils’ Building.

(viii) The Executive Committee with the permission of the Chair has

considered other Items like perusal of direction of Hon’ble High Court

in W.P.No.10889/2009 and decided to pursue the matter with the Standing

Counsel and to prepare a Counter Affidavit on this Writ Petition filed by

Dr.M.A.Gafoor and 20 others against MCI and APMC praying that the APMC has

to incorporate the Clarification in Lr.No.MCI-12(1)/2005-Med.Misc.,

Dt:05.08.2005 of MCI with regard to their MD (Venereology) qualification in

the Registration Certificates.

(ix) The General Body has noted that the Executive Committee decided to

grant Permanent Registration to Dr.J.Sai Kavitha as per the decision taken

earlier.

(x) The General Body has noted that the Executive Committee has decided to

pay the balance amount of Rs.89,487/- to M/s. Team Engineer Systems Pvt.

Ltd., towards installation of mike, after satisfactory demonstration of the

same.

(xi) The General Body has noted that the Executive Committee has decided

that Smt.L.Madhavi Latha be paid enhanced consolidated pay of Rs.9,000/-

w.e.f.01.06.2009 and also sanctioned notional increment to

Smt.D.Varalakshmi in the category of Typist and fixation of pay as Sr.Asst.

w.e.f. 01.06.2009 under FR22(a) (i)

(xii) The General Body has noted that the Executive Committee has

considered to review the work of staff of APMC and decided that suitable

disciplinary action shall be taken as per the rules governing the disciplinary

cases on the erring staff members. The Executive Committee also decided to

prepare a draft memo after considering the Standing Counsel.

(xiii) The General Body approved the recommendation of the Executive

Committee to enhance the Conveyance Allowance of the Registrar from

Rs.3000/- to Rs.5000/- and also to the members of the Staff from Rs.750/- to

Rs.1,000/- w.e.f.01.10.2009. The Finance Committee also approved the

recommendations of the Executive Committee for enhancement of

Conveyance Allowance.

(xiv) The General Body has noted that the Executive Committee has

considered to provide Housing Loans to the Staff of APMC and decided that a

Memorandum of Understanding be executed with the authorities of Bank of

Baroda, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad.

(xv) The General Body has noted that the Executive Committee has decided

that modalities will worked out for upgrading existing Software Project on

Registration Certificates so as to suit that Scanned Photo will appear on the

Registration Certificate.

The General Body after detailed discussion and after careful

consideration of the material placed before it, has decided that the decisions

of the Executive Committee be approved except in the case of decisions taken

under Item - 4 (B) (vii) (Case No.08/2008), 4 (B) (viii) (Case No.24/2008). The

General Body has taken up these issues under Item-4 of the Agenda.

The General Body after going through the minutes of the Executive

Committee meeting dt:01.07.2009 and after detailed discussion decided that

the minutes of the Executive Committee meeting be approved.

(C) The General Body has noted that the Executive Committee in its

meeting held on 27.08.2009 has considered several items and taken

necessary decisions.

(i) The General Body noted that the Executive Committee has

considered the report of E&MPC dated:28.07.2009. In Case.No.08/2008,

the Executive Committee has decided that the Respondent Dr.Thumu

Rama Krishna may also be warned for not maintaining the records in

addition to the decision taken by Executive Committee in its earlier

meeting.

(ii) The General Body noted that the Executive Committee in Case

No.18/2008 has decided that if the Respondent Dr.M.Vishnu Vardhan

Reddy is found hence forth practicing as Ortho Surgeon, action will be

contemplated.

(iii) The General Body noted that in Case No.23/2008 the Executive

Committee has approved the recommendation of E&MPC to stop further

proceedings against Dr.V.Sree Ramulu in accordance with the stay

granted by the Hon’ble High Court.

(iv) (a) The General Body noted that the Executive Committee has

decided the Standing Counsel, APMC be requested to submit to the

Hon’ble High Court, the clarification received from Medical Council of

India through its Letter No.MCI-23(1)/2009/Med/31378, dated:23-08-

2009 wherein the MCI made it clear that the members of its P.G.

Committee had decided that ‘the qualification of M.D.(Venereology) is

also covered in the decision of the General Body of MCI at its meeting

held on 18th February 2006 and it should be treated on par with the

combined speciality as is being done for the candidates having

MD(Dermatology) qualification.’ The Executive Committee also decided

to withdraw the impugned proceedings of the Council dated 15-07-2009,

and the Hon’ble Court be prayed for passing appropriate orders.

(b) The General Body noted that the Executive Committee has decided

that the 30(thirty) doctors be informed through Regd. letters that the

impugned orders of the Council dated 15-07-2009, wherein the

registration of M.D.(Venereology) was kept in abeyance, are withdrawn

as per the clarification given by MCI in its letter dt:23.08.2009. The

General Body also noted that the Executive Committee has decided that

the Principals/Deans of all medical colleges in the State and the

petitioners are communicated the letter received from the Medical

Council of India.

(v) The General Body noted that the Executive Committee has

perused the order passed by the Division Bench of Hon’ble High Court in

W.P.No.1711/2009 and decided that the cases of Quacks be referred to

the concerned DIG/SP/Commissioner of Police and to the Collectors for

initiating necessary action as per law. The General Body noted that the

Executive Committee has also decided to furnish copy of order of

Supreme Court dated: April 2nd, 1992 against Quacks and also enlighten

them of the Court Orders.

(vi) The General Body noted that the Executive Committee has

decided that the Bio-Data of Dr.Pradyut Waghray be forwarded to the

Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India for “PADMA

AWARDS”.

(vii) (a) the General Body noted that the Executive Committee has

considered the Minutes of the meeting of the CME Committee held on

27.08.2009 with reference to work out modalities for formation of small

teams for the purpose of conducting surprise visits / checks on the

Hospitals/Clinics run by un-qualified persons and approved the said

recommendation of the CME Committee.

(b) The Executive Committee has decided that the present amount of

Rs.30/- per student for each session of Ethics Awareness Programme be

continued.

( c) The Executive Committee has decided that the CME Programmes in

the districts be conducted in association with IMA and its local branches.

It was also decided that the guidelines be prepared for sanctioning the

amount of Rs.25,000/- for the CME Programmes conducted at each

district level. It was also decided to prepare a Booklet which shall

contain the Act and functions of APMC and to be distributed at the CME

Programmes so conducted.

(d) The Executive Committee has decided to approve the

recommendations of CME Committee to constitute small teams from the

members of various Committees to make surprise checks/visits. It was

also decided to place the same before the Hon’ble High Court as well as

the Govt. of Andhra Pradesh for appropriate direction in this regard.

The General Body after careful consideration of decisions taken by the

Executive Committee and after detailed discussion has decided to approve the

decisions taken by the Executive Committee in its meeting held on 27-08-

2009 except modification in Item-4 (B) (i) i.e. the decision of the Executive

Committee in the case against Dr.Thumu Rama Krishna. The General Body

made detailed discussion on this issue under Item-4 of the Agenda.

(D) The General Body has taken up for consideration of the Minutes of the

Executive Committee in its meeting held on 22.10.2009 and considered

several items and taken necessary decisions.

(i) The General Body noted that the Executive Committee has

considered the Minutes of E&MPC dated 08-09-2009 and approved the

same subject to modifications.

(a) In Case No.17/2008, the Executive Committee has decided that

here is no negligence on the part of the Respondent, Dr.Garikapati Subba

Rao in treating the patient, Smt. Kalluri Subbayamma.

(b) In Case No.20/2008, the Executive Committee has decided to

approve the recommendation of the E & MPC to close the case, if there is

no further complaint from the complainant, Ms.L. Suvarna. The Executive

Committee has also approved the recommendation of the E & MPC that

further action will be initiated, if any further complaint is received from

the complainant.

(c) In Case No.15/2009, the Executive Committee has approved the

observation/ recommendation of the E & MPC to refer the matter to the

Standing Counsel so as to ascertain whether the Council is competent to

take action against a doctor who was convicted by the Hon’ble High Court

in the year 1999. The Executive Committee has also approved the

decision of the E & MPC to wait for the complainant’s affidavit on the

allegations made in Para-3 of the Regd. Notice dated: 29-07-2009.

(ii) The General Body noted that the Executive Committee has

considered the Report of the Finance Committee dated 15-09-2009 and

approved the same.

(a) The Executive Committee approved the enhancement of the

sitting fee to he members for attending Council/Committee

Meetings w.e.f.01.10.2009. It is decided that the sitting fee

including Local T.A. for members coming from out station be

enhanced to Rs.1,500/-. It is also decided that sitting fee to the

members of Hyderabad City and members from local areas shall

be paid Rs.1,200/- including Local T.A. It is also decided that

accommodation charges for members coming from out station

shall be paid Rs.800/- apart from sitting fee.

(b) The Executive Committee approved the enhancement of the

sitting fee to the members of Council for attending Internees

Ethics awareness programmes conducted in various Medical

Colleges in the State w.e.f.01.10.2009. It is decided that the

sitting fee including Local T.A. for members coming from out

station be enhanced to Rs.1,500/-. It is also decided that

accommodation charges for members coming from out station

shall be paid Rs.800/- apart from the sitting fee. It is also decided

that sitting fee to the members from Hyderabad City and

members of local area shall be Rs.1,200/- including Local T.A. It is

also decided that sitting fee and accommodation charges shall be

paid to the members of the Council for attending Gold Medal

awarding functions on par with the payment of fees to the

members attending Council/Committee meetings.

The General Body noted that the Executive Committee in this

regard has taken into consideration of the request made by Dr.Cipai

Subrahmanyam to consider payment of flight charges for out station

members. The Executive Committee directed the Secretary to obtain

T.A. Rules followed by NTR University of Health Sciences and other

Government Sectors and the necessary details and furnish the same

to the Executive Committee in its next meeting.

(c ) The Executive Committee also decided to direct the Secretary to

address letters to the Principals of Government Medical College with

regard to the conduction of Internees Ethics Awareness Programme.

It is also directed to write specifically that the Gold Medal should be

given to the student by the member of A.P.Medical Council only.

(d) The Executive Committee has decided that the conveyance

allowance to the staff of the Council shall be enhanced from Rs.750/-

to Rs.1,000/- per month w.e.f.01.10.2009. It was also decided that

conveyance allowance of the Registrar of the Council shall be

enhanced from Rs.3,000/- to Rs.5,000/- per month w.e.f.01.10.2009. It

was further decided that next enhancement of the conveyance

allowance to the staff members shall not be considered for the

coming three years.

(e) The Executive Committee decided that the Challans system shall

be introduced immediately towards registration fee and other fee

etc., to the Council.

(f) With regard to the recommendation of the Finance Committee on

“Memorandum of Understanding” towards sanction of Housing Loans

and other Loans to the Staff of the Council, the Executive Committee

has decided that the Memorandum of Understanding executed by the

Bank of Baroda, Hyderabad shall be approved. With regard to the

proposal for giving commitment to the bank for recovery of Loan

Installment from the salary of the Loanee Employee in the case of

default, the Executive Committee has decided to obtain the opinion

of the Sanding Counsel of APMC and the Auditors of the Council.

(g) The Executive Committee has decided that the guidelines for

conducting CME programmes at District Level be worked out. It was

decided to constitute a committee with three members to work out

the guidelines for conducting CME programmes at district level. The

Executive Committee has decided that a booklet covering the Act and

Functions of APMC and IMC Regulations, 2002/2004 relating to

Medical Ethics shall be distributed. The Executive Committee has

decided that the State IMA and bigger branches of IMA be included

for conducting the CME programmes.

(h) The Executive Committee decided that Smt. L.Madhavi Latha be

appointed on regular pay scale attached to the post of Junior

Assistant w.e.f. 01-10-2009, subject to obtaining the opinion of the

Standing Counsel. The Executive Committee also decided that the

opinion of the Standing Counsel be obtained with regard to creating a

post as per exigencies of work and rule position.

(iii) (A) The General Body has noted that the Executive

Committee has considered the decisions of the E&MPC dated 22-10-

2009 and approved the same subject to modifications.

(B) (i) In Case No.01/2009 – The Complaint made by Sri K.Prasad

against Dr.Srinivas Bathini, Ongole, the Executive Committee decided

that the respondent be warned for not maintaining proper records

(Case Sheet) and non submission of records to APMC inspite of

insistence for the same.

(ii) In Case No.03/2009 – The complaint made by Md.Reyaz Pasha

against Dr.Sameer Diwale and Dr.K.Satyanarayana of Kamineni

Hospitals, Hyderabad, the Executive Committee has decided that

there is no professional negligence on the part of respondent

doctors.

(iii) In Case No.20/2008 – The complaint made by Ms.L.Suvarna

against Dr.S.V.Adinarayana Rao, Visakhapatnam, the Executive

Committee has decided that the complaint made by Ms.L.Suvarna be

closed as there is no further complaint from the complainant

regarding this case even after a registered letters dt: 02.09.2009

addressed to her.

(iv) In Case No.16/2009 – The complaint made by Sri Meduri Ramesh

Chandra against Dr.G.V.Jagadamba and M.Bharathi, the Executive

Committee decided that the respondents do not fall within the

jurisdiction of APMC as they are Non-Medical Forensic Experts. The

Executive Committee also decided that the complainant may be

addressed that he may represent the matter before the concerned

authorities for redressal of his grievance.

(v) The Executive Committee decided that after the Foreign

Qualifications like M.D. (Physician) equivalent to MBBS be mentioned.

The General Body after careful consideration of minutes of

meeting of the Executive Committee dt:22.10.2009 and after detailed

discussion has decided to approve the same with modifications. The

General Body decided to approve the decisions of the Executive

Committee taken under Items-4, 6 & 7.

The General Body decided to approve the decisions of the

Executive Committee taken under -8 (B) (v), 8 (B) (vi), 8 (B) (viii) and

8 (B) (ix).

The General Body after detailed discussion has modified the

decisions of the Executive Committee under Item-8 (B) (i) and Item-8

(B) (iv). The detailed discussions are made under Item-4 of the

Agenda.

Then the General Body has taken up for consideration of

Minutes of the meeting of the Executive Committee

dated:26.11.2009. The members have gone through the notes

provided under this item.

(E) The General Body has noted that the Executive Committee in its

meeting held on 26.11.2009. The Executive Committee has

considered several items and taken the following decisions.

(i) The Executive Committee has decided that the qualification

of MD (Physician) be followed with the words ‘Equivalent to

MBBS’ which shall followed by the University.

(ii) (a) The Executive Committee has decided that the matter

pertaining to W.P. No.1711/2009 be taken up for consideration

as and when the Hon’ble High Court passes necessary orders.

(b) The Executive Committee has decided that the information available on

Delhi Medical Council Web-site be downloaded so as to know the powers of the

Delhi Medical Council under its Act, Rules and Regulations in the matters of

practice of Modern Medicine by Quacks and other unauthorized persons. It is

further decided that the same be placed before the Executive Committee in its next

meeting.

(iii) The Executive Committee has ratified the action taken by the Chairman, the

APMC in sanctioning additional DA to the staff of the Council as per the orders

issued by the Govt. in GO Ms.No.265, dt:26-10-2009 Finance (PC-I) Dept.

(iv) The Executive Committee has decided that the services of Sri G.Anil Kumar,

Jr.Asst. be regularised from 01-08-2008 and his probation be declared w.e.f.01-08-

2009 as he completed one year of satisfactory service in the post of Junior Asst.

(v) The Executive Committee has decided that the services of Sri V.Suresh,

Office subordinate be regularised from 01-08-2008 and his probation be declared

w.e.f. 01-08-2009 as he completed one year of satisfactory service in the post of

Office subordinate.

(vi) The Executive Committee has considered with the permission of the Chair

and decided to direct the Secretary to pursue the matter with the Standing Counsel

of the AP Medical Council and to initiate necessary action for incorporating

amendments to the APMP Registration Act and Rules made thereunder together

with making Regulations as are required under the Act.

The General Body after going through notes provided under this item and after

detailed discussion has decided to approve the decisions taken by the Executive

Committee.

(i) It is decided that the M.D. (Physician) Qualification be mentioned as “MD

(Physician) followed by the name of the University, Country, month and year of

completion of Internship in India with “Equivalent to MBBS”.

It is also decided that all registered practitioners possessing foreign qualifications

like MD (Physician) be directed to display their qualification in their Name Boards/Display

Boards, Prescription Pads, Reports etc. by suffixing the words “Equivalent to MBBS”.

It is further decided to communicate the decision of the Council to all those doctors

possessing M.D (Physician) Qualifications and registered with APMC through a “REGD.

A/D LETTER” directing them to comply with the decision of the Council.

(ii) (a) It is decided to take up the matter pertaining to Writ Petition.No.1711 of 2009 to

taken up for consideration as and when the Hon’ble High Court possess necessary

orders in this regard.

(b) It is decided to download the information available on the Web-site of Delhi Medical

Council so as to know the powers of the Delhi Medical Council under its Act, Rules and

Regulations in the matters of practice of Modern Medicine by Quacks and other un-

qualified persons. It is further decided that the same may be placed before the Executive

Committee in its next meeting.

(iii) The General Body ratified the action of the Chairman in sanctioning Addl. D.A. to

the staff of the Council.

(iv) The General Body decided to regularise the services of Sri G.Anil Kumar, Junior

Assistant, w.e.f. 01.08.2009. It is also decided to declare his probation w.e.f.01.08.2009.

(v) The General Body decided to regularise the services of Sri V.Suresh, Office

Subordinate, w.e.f. 01.08.2009. It is also decided to declare his probation

w.e.f.01.08.2009.

(vi) The General Body decided to direct the Secretary to initiate action for incorporating

amendments to the APMC Red. Act, 1968 and the Rules made thereunder and to make

Regulations as are required under the Act. It is decided to direct the Secretary to pursue

the matter with the Standing Counsel of the Council.

Item-3:- Then the General Body has taken up for consideration of the next

item on the Agenda ‘to consider the brief report of the Chairman, E&MPC and

to peruse the status of complaints pending before the Council’.

The General Body noted that there were 91 Complaints received during

the period of 01.01.2006 – 24.11.2009 and 52 Cases were disposed by the

General Body upto 20.01.2009. The General Body noted that One Case of

2006, Two Cases of 2007, Nine Cases of 2008 and Three Cases of 2009 are

placed before the General Body with necessary

observations/recommendations of the Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee and

the decisions taken by the Executive Committee.

The members noted the details furnished by the Secretary that the

Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee in its meeting held on 22.11.2009 has

considered nine cases and the observations/recommendations of the E&MPC

together with the decision of the Executive Committee will be placed before

the General Body in its next meeting.

The members also noted that Case No.21/2009 – the complaint made by

the members of IMA, Jagtial Branch against Dr.G.Venugopal Reddy and

Dr.G.Sashikanth Reddy is being enquired by the Ethical & Mal-Practices

Committee expeditiously keeping in view of the directions of Hon’ble Minister

for Health & Family Welfare.

After going through the details provided in the Report and the details

given by the Secretary in this regard, it is decided that the report be

approved.


item on the Agenda ‘to consider the reports of the E&MPC dated: 15.02.2009,

30.04.2009, 26.05.2009, 26.06.2009, 27.07.2009, 08.09.2009, 22.10.2009’.

(A) The General Body noted that the E&MPC in its meeting held on 15-02-

2009 has recorded the statements of parties concerned in Case No.02/2008

and taken up for consideration of Case No.09/2006, Case No.08/2008, Case

No.12/2008, Case No.13/2008, Cases No.16/2008 to 22/2008 for initiating

further necessary action.

(B) The General Body noted that the E&MPC in its meeting held on 30-04-

2009 has considered several cases.

(C) In Case No.23/2008 it was decided to stop further proceedings in the

matter in view of the Interim Stay granted by the Hon’ble High Court

on the orders passed by the 3rd Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court,

Secunderabad dated: 04.07.2008. In some cases the E&MPC has

decided to issue summons to the concerned parties.

(D) In Case No. 09/2006-complaint made by Sri S.Harinatha Baba against

Dr.C.Narasimhan of Care Hospital, the E&MPC has approved the

expert opinion given by Dr.C.Shakunthala and approved the same

and made its detailed observations/recommendations. The

recommendations of the E & MPC were approved by the Executive

Committee in its meeting held on 20-05-2009.

The General Body noted that the E&MPC has made the following

observations/ recommendations in this Case.

The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee observed that as per the

Complainant, Sri Harinatha Baba his daughter Ms. Swathi studying MD at

Zapharozia University, Ukraine and she was under medical treatment at Care

Hospital, Nampally for recurrent palpitations followed by Syncopal attracks.

She was under treatment of Dr.Narasimhan, Cardiologist from 01-02-2005 to

02-02-2005 at Care hospital and after thorough investigation on being

declared fit she was discharged on 02-02-2005. Further she visited the

Physician on 07-02-2005 at Care Hospital. She was prescribed medicines for

two months. On being made fit, she flew to Ukraine on 27-02-2005. The

complaint has been forwarded by MCI in its letter dated 03-01-2006 and

requested APMC to investigate & take necessary action in the matter. The E &

MPC observed that complainant has alleged that “before her departure to

Zapharozia, Ukraine on 27-02-2005 and she was under medical treatment at

CARE Hospital, Nampally for recurrent palpitations followed by Syncopal

attracks. She expired on 04-04-2005 at Ukraine. Medical authorities at Ukraine

have stated the cause of death as “Pre excitement syndrome sudden cardial

arrest” The E&MPC observed that the complainant alleged that the treatment

at CARE Hospital does not appear to be proper, insufficient and incorrect as

such has led to Ms.Swathi’s death.” As per the notice issued in this regard,

the respondent Dr.C.Narasimhan has filed an affidavit duly denying the

allegations made against him. In his reply affidavit he has stated that the

‘complainant has raised the issue of alleged negligence on three counts

namely being diagnostic negligence, procedural negligence and administrative

negligence’ and submitted his detailed explanation. He has stated that “the

methodology of diagnosis, the catheter ablation procedure and post

procedural follow up were all done as per the standard of established

international norms” .

The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee after careful consideration of the

material available on record and the further information provided by the

complainant has decided to refer the matter to a Cardiologist for his expert

opinion.

The matter was referred to a Senior Cardiologist, Dr.C.Shakuntala – Prof.

& HOD Cardiology (Retd.), GMC/Gandhi Hospital, Hyderabad. She made her

detailed observations/comments on this issue. The General Body noted that

she has concluded her opinion by stating that “the respondent doctor is

competent according to his experience and degrees. Because of the main

problem of Syncope she was investigated immediately by the doctor. Being

educated person, patient’s father should have elicited more information about

arrhythmia before giving consent”. The General Body has noted that she has

further stated that “No doubt, the patient’s father S.Harinatha Baba is hurt

because of daughter’s death. One cannot expect 100% success in every

procedure or surgery or from Medical Management of patient in all ailments.”

The General Body gone through the further observations of the E&MPC

and noted that both the parties did not appear before the Committee and no

communication has been received from either party. The General Body noted

that the Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee after careful consideration of the

expert opinion given by Dr.C.Shakunthala and taking into consideration of

entire material available on record has made the following

recommendations/observations:

“There is no negligence on the part of Dr.C.Narasimhan, Cardiologist in

treating the patient Ms.Swathi at Care Hospitals, Hyderabad”.

The General Body noted that the Executive Committee in its meeting

held on 20.05.2009 has considered this item and approved the

observations/recommendations of E&MPC.

The General Body taking into consideration of the

Observations/recommendations of the Ethical & Mal Practices Committee,

decision of the Executive Committee together with the expert opinion given by

Dr.C.Shakunthala, Cardiologist and after detailed discussion has decided to

approve the observations/recommendations of the Ethical & Mal Practices

Committee as approved by the Executive Committee. The General Body

observed that the complainant has not furnished any record or details of

treatment given to his daughter in Ukraine. provided came to the conclusion

that ‘there is no negligence on the part of the Respondent, Dr.C.Narasimhan in

treating the patient, Ms.S.Swathi at Care Hospital, Hyderabad. Moreover, the

death has occurred in Ukraine.

Then the General Body has considered the observations/recommendations

of Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee in Case No.23/2007. The Chairman,

E&MPC has elicited brief facts of the case. The General Body noted that the

complainant Sri B.Venkateswara Reddy on 17.12.2007 made a complaint

against Dr.G.Satyanarayana, Dr.G.Laxmana Sastry, Dr.Ravi Shankar,

Dr.Ashwin Shaw, Dr.Srinivas, Dr.Radha Sagar, and Dr.Eshwar Chandra of

Kamineni Hospitals. He alleged that his father B.Uttam Reddy was admitted in

Kamineni Hospital and operation was conducted by the above doctors on

02.07.2003 and exploration surgery was conducted on 05-07-2003; the

patient died on 07-07-2003.

The General Body noted that the complainant has filed his complaint in the

form of an affidavit on 22-10-2008 and submitted other documents. The

General Body noted that all the above respondents have filed their reply

affidavits wherein they denied the allegations of negligence in treating the

complainant’s father. The complainant and the respondents,

Dr.G.Satyanarayana and Dr.N.Eshwar Chandra have appeared before the

Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee on 16.09.2008 and their statements are on

record. Dr.Ashwin Shaw and Dr.Srinivas have also appeared before the

Committee and stated that they have no role in this case since they have

attended the Tumor Board meeting held on 01.07.2003. The General Body

noted that other respondents, Dr.S.Radha, Dr.B.Ravi Shankar and

Dr.G.Laxmana Sastry filed their reply affidavits.

The General Body noted that the E & MPC held several hearings in this case

and considered voluminous material filed by the complainant. The Ethical &

Mal-Practices Committee in its meeting held on 30.04.2009 taking into

consideration of the entire material on record and the statements made by the

parties concerned has made its detailed observations/recommendations

extracted below:

“As per the statement made before the Committee, the Complainant, Sri

B.Venkateswara Reddy filed an affidavit and other documents on 22.10.2008.

The same was considered by the Committee in its meeting held on

26.10.2008. The Committee noted that others Respondents, Dr.Ravi Shankar,

Dr.Radha Sagar and Dr.G.Lakshmana Sastry have filed their reply affidavits.

As it requires lot of time for going through the material, it is decided to take

this case in the next meeting of E&MPC.

In his affidavit the complainant, Sri B.Venkateswara Reddy has

reiterated the statement made by him in his complaint dt: 13.12.2007, but

made certain fresh allegations. He has stated that as per the advise of doctors

of Kamineni Hospital, i.e. Dr.Ravi Shankar, my father was under gone several

tests like X-Ray, Endoscopy, Ultrasonography, abdomen (male) Radiologist

diagnosis tests, CT Abdomen, Rectal I.V. Contrast, Gastroenterology,

(colonoscopy), pathological and clinical tests conducted 23.06.2003. I and my

brother discussed with Dr.B.Ravi Shankar and got opined that the Dr.Ravi

Shankar could not arrive to conclusion regarding the patient real problem

even after conducting several above tests in past 2 days. Dr.B.Ravi Shankar

assured that there is no seriousness to patient and it can be treated with

either Chemotherapy or Radiotherapy rather than to go for surgery. He

contended that Dr.B.Ravi Shankar created false hopes and did not reveal to

the complainant about the condition of the patient. Dr.B.Ravi Shankar has

changed his versions on 26.06.2003 and advised to go for surgery for my

father, because the patient condition was not normal. Dr.B.Ravishankar

further demanded a huge amount of Rs.70,000/- for the treatment of my

father. As per the advice of the doctor, my father was admitted in to Kamineni

Hospital as in-patient, on 30.06.2003. The patient underwent several clinical

tests besides several pathological tests also repeatedly. The Doctors of

Kamineni Hospital told that the patient would require huge quantity of blood

at the time of operation. Accordingly, the complainant arranged the blood

required and while the patient was undergoing the operation, again they

required blood arranged by me as per direction of Doctors. The complainant

submitted that after the surgery, the patient kept in acute medical care

unit/post operative ward and neither mine nor other attendants were allowed

to see the condition of the patient after the surgery. I submit that

Dr.G.Satyanarayana expressed his doubt about the possibilities of some other

problems like leakages in stomach, while sending the patient into AMC Unit /

PO Ward and the doctor did not explain the actual condition of the patient and

actual surgery what was done. The complainant contended that he was told

different versions and created false hopes by the Respondents individually

and he got illusion regarding the surgery what was done. He further alleged

that the doctors of Kamineni Hospital failed to arrive at correct decision about

the final diagnosis and they were in dilemma regarding TUBERCULOSIS or

CROHNS DISCEASE, but he was told that they conducted operation to the

patient for CARCINOMA ASSENDING COLON PERITONITIS. The patient expired

on 07.07.2003 at about 08.30 pm i.e. 5th post operative day and according to

discharge summary it reveals that date of operation conducted on 05.07.2003.

He contended that he was unable to find the circumstances and possibilities of

versions of doctors, which are different. He has stated that the patient’s

condition was declared normal on 1st & 2nd postoperative days, but surprisingly

on 3rd postoperative day, the opposite party revealed that there was a leak

from the ANASTOMOTIC site causing secondary peritonitis and septicemia was

suspected. The complainant contended that the condition happened to the

patient / deceased was due to negligence of doctors in rendering service to

the patient during that time. Simultaneously, the patient was taken for

REXPLORATIN and then the observation was that 1 ½ lts. of foul smelling

straw-coloured fluid in the peritoneal cavity, by Dr.Satyanarayana and

Dr.Laxmana Sastry. The complainant contended that this condition was

developed purely because of infection while the surgery was done and there

was no proper care and hygienic mechanism was not observed and they came

to the conclusion that due to this the patient’s condition was turned to the

death side.

The complainant further contended that the stand taken by

Dr.G.Satyanarayana and Dr.B.Ravi Shankar regarding his father’s illness put

up before the Tumour Board for discussions regarding Tumour Cases is

belated and denied. It can be seen from the Tumour Board meeting register

2003, the case has been put up for discussion on 31st June, 2003. But the

month of June does not 31 days. Description of the patient has been stated as

Female.

He contended that all documents prepared by Kamineni Hospital,

Dr.G.Satyanarayana and Dr.Ravi Shankar are to over come their negligence

during the course of treatment of his father and for the purpose of misleading

the courts.

The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee in its meeting held on

23.12.2008 has considered this case and noted that the other three doctors,

viz. Dr.G.Laxmana Sastry, Dr.S. Radha and Dr.B.Ravishankar have filed their

affidavits as directed in this behalf. The Ethical Committee noted that “the

complainant has filed additional affidavit and other material containing 229

pages. The E&MPC observed that some of the material papers filed by the

complainant do not constitute any evidence required in this case and even if

the material gives any substantial evidence to prove the case of the

complainant and shows that the respondent doctors are guilty of negligence, it

has to be established by the complainant himself. In these circumstances and

in the absence of any evidence produced by the complainant as to the order

passed by the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, R.R.Dist and in view of

the voluminous material filed by the Complainant for examination of which, it

has taken lot of time for the Committee to consider the matter.

The E&MPC has gone through the affidavits filed by Dr.S.Radha,

Pathologist, Dr.G.Laxmana Sastry and B.Ravi Shankar, Medical Gastro

Enterologist. The committee noted that Dr.S.Radha has stated that she is not

concerned with any of the allegations made in the complaint except with

regard to the proceedings took place before the tumor board on 01.07.2003

since she was one of the participant in the Tumour Board meeting. She has

also stated that to the best of her knowledge and memory, the case of Utham

Reddy was discussed before the Tumour Board that he was suffering with

CARCINOMA COLON and they explored various options of treatment and risk

complications involved in the treatment and finally the participants concluded

that firstly the malignant tumour (mass) has to be removed through surgical

intervention and there after the patient will be treated either Chemotherapy or

Radiotherapy or both depending upon the circumstances of the patient.

The committee noted that, Dr.G.Laxmana Sastry in his affidavit has

stated that he is not aware of the allegations made in the complaint or not

concerned with them except with regard to the proceedings took place before

the Tumour Board on 01.07.2003 since he was one of the participants in the

Tumour Board meeting. He has stated that his name was routinely mentioned

in the discharge summary as he was one of the consultants in the Department

of General Surgery, Kamineni Hospital, L.B.Nagar. He has further stated that

the complaint is misconceived and vexatious in nature and appears that the

complaint has been filed with a malafide intention to black mail and harass

doctors. He contended that complaint of this nature will cause great mental

agony and the doctors and their families will be put to great loss and damage

and financial loss.

The Committee has gone through the affidavit filed by Dr.B.Ravi

Shankar, Medical Gastro-enterologist and noted that he has stated that Late

B.Utham Reddy had approached Kamineni Hospitals on 23-06-2003 and was

seen as out patient with the complaints of altered bowel habits, dyspepsia,

anorexia and weight loss and he underwent tests such as ultra-sonography,

C.T.Scan of abdomen and colonoscopy (done on 24-06-2003), revealed a large

growth involving ascending colon and proximal transverse colon. As

colonoscopy alone cannot confirm malignancy, biopsy of the lesion was also

performed and the report had come on 26-06-2003. Biopsy of the lesion was

suggestive of Adenocarcinoma, thereby confirming colonic cancer. The

Committee has gone through his further statement that the patient as well as

his attendants were informed on 27-06-2003 regarding the diagnosis of

cancer. Patient was suggested to get admitted to the hospital as surgery was

required for treatment of colon cancer. He was admitted on 30-06-2003 and

operated on 02-07-2003. He expired on 07-07-2003 due to the complications

of cancer. The operation was performed by Dr.Satyanarayana and his team.

Dr.Ravi Shankar has further stated that his job as Medical Gastro-enterologist

was limited to evaluation, workup and colonoscopy including biopsy. He has

stated that the allegation of the complainant that he has not helped him

procuring the case sheet and other bills is totally false. The mistakes of date

and sex probably are simple clerical errors and totally unrelated to the

management of patient.

After going through the complaint made by Sri B.Venkateswara Reddy

dt.13-12-2007, his statement made before the Committee on 16-09-2008 his

further affidavit dated 21-10-2008 the affidavits filed by Dr.G.Satyanarayana,

Dr.B.Ravi Shankar and others, the statements of Dr.G.Satyanarayana &

Dr.N.Eshwar Chandra and other material on record and after detailed

discussion, the Committee came to the conclusion that there was no

negligence on the part of Dr.G.Satyanarayana, Dr.N.Eshwar Chandra or

Dr.B.Ravi Shankar. The E&MPC is of the opinion that there was no role of

Dr.G.Laxmana Sastry, Dr.S. Radha and Dr.M.Srinivas. They were participants

in the tumour board meeting held on 01-07-2003. The Committee is of the

opinion that “the mistake of date of Tumour Board meeting as 31-06-2003 and

the sex of patient as Female are clerical errors and totally unrelated to the

management of the patient. With regard to the further allegation of the

complainant that two different death summaries issued to him, wherein in one

death summary the Principal Diagnosis was mentioned as Carcinoma

Ascending Peritonitis + and in the second one the Principal Diagnosis was

mentioned as Carcinoma Ascending Colon Peritonitis + Septicemic Shock, the

committee has taken into consideration of the statement of

Dr.G.Satyanarayana that the death summary bearing ‘District Forum, Ranga

Reddy District’ was issued by him and correct one and the other death

ceremony bearing the ‘ Kamineni Hospitals’ stamp was not issued by him. The

committee has also taken into consideration of the statement of

Dr.G.Satyanarayana that the signature appeared in that death summary is not

his own”.

In the above circumstances, the E&MPC came to the conclusion that the

allegations made by the complainant, Sri B.Venkateswar Reddy are not proved

against any of the above mentioned doctors and the cause of death was

Septicaemia. The E&MPC has taken into consideration of the statement made

by Dr.G.Satyanarayana before the committee on 16.09.2008 as to which was

the cause of death, he has stated that it is not iatrogenic the disease process

i.e. Ca. ascending colon which has caused obstruction and has spread beyond

the boundaries of the colon has required extensive dissection and resection of

the bowl leading to the post-operative complication of peritonitis which is a

known complication that has resulted in Septicaemia which is ultimately

responsible for the death inspite of all the feasible measures taken by the

treating doctors. The E&MPC has also taking into consideration of the

statement that ‘the death was not directly caused by the Carcinoma which

was the ultimate cause of death has resulted as a result of peritonitis which

was developed as a known complication of the extensive dissection and

resection that was required for the surgical treatment of the carcinoma’.

The General Body noted that the Executive Committee in its meeting

held on 20.05.2009 has considered this item and approved the

observations/recommendations of the E&MPC.



Committee has decided that the allegations made by the complainant, Sri

B.Venkateswara Reddy are not proved against any of the respondents and the

cause of death was Septicemia. The ultimate cause of death has resulted as a

result of peritonitis which was developed as a known complication of the

extensive dissection and resection that was required for the surgical

treatment of the carcinoma.

The General Body noted that the E&MPC considered other cases and

decided to take up the same in the next meeting for further consideration. The

General Body after taking into consideration of the minutes of the meeting of

the E&MPC dt:30.04.2009 and the decisions taken by the Executive

Committee in its meeting held on 20.05.2009 has decided to approve the

same.

(C ) Then the General Body has taken up for consideration of minutes of the

meeting of E&MPC dt:26.05.2009. The General Body noted that the E&MPC

has recorded the statement of the respondent Dr.Bachu Radha Krishna and

the same is on record. The E&MPC has also recorded the statements of the

complainant and the respondent in Case No.12/2008. The E&MPC has

recorded the statements of the respondents in Case Nos. 13/2008, 19/2008

and the statements of parties concerned in Case No.24/2008. The General

Body noted that the E&MPC has not made specific

observations/recommendations in any case. The General Body noted that the

minutes of the E&MPC were placed before the Executive Committee in its

meeting held on 01.07.2009 and approved the same.

After careful consideration and detailed discussion it is decided to

approve the minutes of the E&MPC meeting dt:26.05.2009.

(D) Then the General Body has taken up for consideration of minutes of the

meeting of E&MPC dt:26.06.2009.

The General Body noted that the E&MPC recorded the statement of the

respondent Dr.G.Subba Rao in Case No.17/2008 and the respondent

Dr.V.V.Reddy in Case No.18/2008. The General Body noted that in Case

No.18/2008, the complainant, Sri M.G.Ramulu Yadav has submitted an

application to the Committee seeking permission of the Council to withdraw

the complaint.

The General Body also noted that the parties concerned in Case

No.20/2008 and Case No.21/2008 have appeared before the E&MPC and their

statements are on record.

The General Body noted that the E&MPC has made detailed observations /

recommendations in Case No.08/2008, 12/2008, 13/2008, 24/2008 & 22/2007.

The detailed observations/recommendations together with the statements

made by parties concerned in other cases were considered by the Executive

Committee in its meeting held on 01.07.2009. The Executive Committee after

careful consideration of the material placed before it and taking into

consideration of the observations/recommendations of the E&MPC has decided

to approve the same. However, in Case No.08/2008, the Executive Committee

in its meeting held on 28.07.2009 has observed that the respondent Dr.Thumu

Rama Krishna has stated that ‘they could not record the resuscitative

measures as they were very hurry to save the patient and shifted the patient

to another hospital and meantime the patients attendants threatened the

nursing staff and taken away the case sheet without any permission’. The

Executive Committee taking into consideration of the same, decided that the

Respondent Dr.Thumu Rama Krishna be warned for not maintaining proper

records.

The General Body has considered the entire material on record together

with the statements made by the parties concerned,the

observations/recommendations of the Ethical &

Mal-Practices Committee and decision of the Executive Committee. The

General Body had detailed discussion on this item. Dr.P.Sucharitha Murthy, Ex-

officio Member expressed the view that the respondent should not give any

publicity in future and in case if he do so his name shall be removed from the

Medical Register. She has also expressed the view that why the respondent

has not registered this case as ‘MLC Case‘. Dr.E.Ravinder Reddy speaking on

the occasion expressed the view that it is the responsibility of the Hospital

management for registration of the case under MLC. Dr.B.Raj Siddharth

expressed the view that we can not come to any conclusion binding ourselves

on the allegations made by the complainants if the E&MPC finds any

negligence on the part of treating doctor and if the E&MPC finds the doctor

concerned guilty of negligence, then the respondent doctor is liable for

punishment for the allegations of negligence. He has pointed out that there

are several lapses on the part of the respondent i.e.

(i) MLC Case was not registered by the Hospital Management.

(ii) The case-sheet was not maintained properly.

(iii) Death Certificate was not submitted either by the complainant or

respondent.

Dr.P.Vijay Chander Reddy, Chairman E&MPC while explaining case in detail

has expressed the view that the E&MPC made its recommendations on the

following points:

(i) On the treatment part, (ii) Non maintenance of records, (iii) Giving wide

publicity

Dr.Ramesh Reddy, Member while speaking on the occasion has

expressed the view that the respondent doctor has violated the regulations

made under IMC Act, such as not maintaining proper records and giving wide

publicity. He has expressed the view that if he is found giving advertisements

in future glorifying his personal image, then his name should be removed from

the Medical Register as per IMC Regulations 2002.


observations/recommendations of E&MPC and the decision taken by the

Executive Committee and after detailed discussion has decided to impose

“Censure” on the respondent Dr.Thumu Rama Krishna for the foregoing

reasons and the lapses committed by him. It is also decided to record the

“Censure” in the Medical Register. It is also decided that if the respondent

doctor is found giving advertisements in future, his name will be removed

from Medical Register treating such an act as professional mis-conduct on his

part.

Then the General Body has gone through the

observations/recommendations of E&MPC in Case No.22/2007- the Complaint

made by Sri B.Kishore against Dr.Bachu Radha Krishna.

The General Body has noted that the complainant Sri B.Kishore alleged

that “the respondent has given wrong treatment to his father and put the

entire family in mental agony”. The respondent filed his reply affidavit denying

the allegations made by the complainant against him. Both the parties

appeared before the E&MPC on 16-09-2009 and their statements are on

record. As per the contentions raised by the complainant that the patient was

admitted in Kamineni Hospital and the doctors at Kamineni Hospital have

treated the patient, notice was issued to Dr.Jaidip Ray Chaudhury to submit

his explanation as to the treatment given by him. Accordingly, Dr.Jaidip Ray

Chaudhury submitted his reply affidavit. As per the notice issued in this

regard, he has appeared before the E & MPC and his statement is on record.

As per the affidavit filed by Dr.Jaidip Ray Chaudhury and his statement before

the Ethical & Mal Practices Committee on 30-04-2009, it has become

necessary to direct the Respondent, Dr.Bachu Radha Krishna to appear before

the E & MPC. Accordingly, he appeared before the E & MPC on 26-05-2009 and

his statement is on record.

Taking into consideration of the entire material on record together with

the statements made by the parties concerned, the E & MPC made the

following observations:

“The E & MPC has gone through the Statement made by Dr.Jay Dip Ray

Chaudhuri before the Committee on 30.04.2009 and noted that on the day of

admission, patient was alert, complaint of severe abdominal (lower) pain and

had weakness of both lower limbs. He had bowel incontinence. Investigation

reports show: RBS-135, Urea-88 (reative-6 Na-139, K-48, Hb 10.1gm% TLC

7600 Plauleb 1058 lack, EST-85 (UE-Puscells-Plenty, RBC+, Alt+). He has

stated that patient did not bring any report with him and investigations

conducted at Kamineni Hospital revealed ARF. Patient had ARF and epidural

absean with high creatinine levels at admission. Since this issue pertains to

Nephrology and Neuro Surgery, he stated that he is not the correct person to

comment about negligence in this patient.

The Committee has gone through the affidavit filed by Dr.Jay Dip Ray

Chaudhuri and noted that the patient was given treatment at Kamineni

Hospital from 18.07.2007 to 08.08.2007 under his supervision as senior

consultant Neurologist. In the affidavit it was stated that after necessary

investigations like CUE, Creatinine Levels and USG Abdomen, he was

diagnosed to have urinary tract infection, acute renal failure, retention of urine

and epidural abscess. It was further stated that he recovered and his

creatinine levels came down to near normal and he was discharged when he

was ambulant on 08.08.2007.

The Ethical & Mal Practices Committee noted that the Respondent,

Dr.Batchu Radha Krishna, in his reply Affidavit dated 18-7-2008 has stated

that ‘the patient recovered, his general condition was good, all vitals were

stable and got full neurological recovery, hypertension was under control,

suture lined healed well as such the patient was discharged from his Hospital

on 6-6-2007’ and admittedly the patient was taken to Kamineni Hospitals on

18-07-2007, i.e. with a gap of 42 days. As to the allegation of the Complainant

that the Respondent has not taken full care and negligently treated the

patient, thereby caused huge financial loss and physical disability, the E &

MPC noted that the Respondent denied the same. After taking into

consideration of the entire material on record, after careful consideration of

the Affidavits filed by Dr.Batchu Radha Krishna, Dr.Jaydip Ray Chaudhury and

the statements made by the parties concerned, the Ethical & Mal Practices

Committee observes that there is no negligence on the part of Dr.Batchu

Radha Krishna in treating the patient B.Prakash. The E & MPC has considered

the objections raised by the Respondent, Dr.Batchu Radha Krishna before the

Committee on 26-5-2009 that he has already appeared before the committee

earlier and his statement is on record. The committee has also noted that he

has referred to Rule-6 of APMC Enquiry Rules, 1978. The E & MPC observed

that the respondent has quoted Rule-6 of the Rules erroneously. The E & MPC

also noted that according to the proviso given under Rule 4 (2) of the Rules

says that “The Committee appointed to make a preliminary enquiry shall have

power to cause further investigation to be made and take further evidence

and also any legal advice or procure any legal assistance as it may think

necessary”.The E & MPC observed that objections raised by the Respondent,

Dr.Bachu Radha Krishna are not maintainable in view of APMC Enquiry Rules,

1978. The E & MPC is of the opinion that examination of the Respondent,

Dr.Batchu Radha Krishna has become necessary in view of the allegations

made by the Complainant that ‘the patient was admitted in Kamineni Hospital

and the doctors conducted all neurology, nephrology tests and treated him for

22 days and was discharged on 08-08-2007’. The Complainant also contended

that the doctors at Kamineni Hospital have stated that the patient’s condition

has become serious as treatment was not given at an appropriate time by a

competent doctor and on account of negligence. Having considered the

complaint and taking into consideration of the fact that the Patient was

treated at Kamineni Hospitals, Hyderabad and the contention of the

Complainant that they had incurred an expenditure of Rs.3,86,600/-, the

E&MPC in its meeting held on 16-09-2008 has decided to issue notice to Dr.Jay

Dip Ray Chaudhury calling for his explanation as to the treatment given to the

patient, Sri B.Prakash at Kamineni Hospitals, Hyderabad. Accordingly, Dr. Jay

Dip Ray Chaudhury has submitted his reply affidavit and Case-sheet

pertaining to the patient “.

The E&MPC taking into consideration of the entire material on record

and after detailed discussion came to the conclusion that ‘there is no

negligence on the part of Dr.Batchu Radha Krishna in treating the patient, Sri

B.Prakash at Satya Hospital, Warangal. The objections raised by Dr.Bachu

Radha Krishna in directing him to appear before the Committee are not

maintainable in view of the provisions contained in Rule-6 of APMC Enquiry

Rules, 1978”

The Executive Committee in its meeting held on 01.07.2009 has

approved the observations / recommendations of the E&MPC.

The General Body taking into consideration of the entire material on

record together with the statements made by the parties concerned and after

detailed discussion is of the opinion that ‘there is no negligence on the part of

Dr.Batchu Radha Krishna in treating the patient, Sri B.Prakash at Satya

Hospital, Warangal. The objections raised by Dr.Bachu Radha Krishna in

directing him to appear before the Committee are not maintainable in view of

the provisions contained in Rule-6 of APMC Enquiry Rules, 1978’.

Then the General Body has taken up for consideration of the

observations / recommendations of Ethical & Mal Practices

Committee in Case No.24/2008 – the Complaint made by Dr.Kylas

Pabba against Dr.A.Sai Ravi Shankar. The General Body has gone

through observations / recommendations of E& MP C and noted that

the Complainant, Dr.Kylas Pabba in his complaint dt:16.12.2008 has

alleged that the Respondent doctor has done PDDC at NIMS from

28.02.2001 to 27.02.2003 and prior to that he took DNB Training for

few months. He has alleged that he is practicing as consultant

Cardiologist for the last 5 ½ years at Karimnagar (formerly in First

Medical Hospitals, now in Shivaram Hospitals) with the following

degrees.

1. M.D. (Med.) DNB (Tr.), D.Card. (NIMS), 2) M.D. (Med.) (DNB Tr.), D.Card. (NIMS).

3. M.D. (Med.) DNB Card (NIMS) (In the middle), 4) M.D.(Med.)

(DNB Tr.),

D.Card,(NIMS) once again.

The Complainant has requested for verification of degrees of

the respondent and instruct him to explain the way in which he is

utilizing DNB Degree and D.Card and how he can occupy the position

of consultant cardiologist and to work as an independent cardiologist

in such a hospital.

The Respondent, Dr.A.Sai Ravi Shanker was requested to submit

his explanation on the allegations made by the complainant against

him. He has filed his reply affidavit duly denying the allegations.

As per the summons issued in this regard, both the parties appeared

before the E&MPC on 26.05.2009. The E & MPC put certain questions to the

Complainant. The E & MPC desired to know about his main allegation. The

Complainant has stated that his main allegation is that Dr.A.Sai Ravi Shankar

does not have valid Degree to be called as Consultant Cardiologist. He has not

qualified in DNB Cardiology or DM Cardiology. So he should not practice as

Consultant Cardiologist and he should not exhibit DNB or DM in any way. The

Complainant has enclosed four prescriptions which were prescribed and

signed by the Respondent and contended that the Respondent has

misrepresented his degrees in the prescriptions which he has furnished to the

E & MPC. As to the further question, what was his objection regarding

Registration of the Respondent, he has stated that your objection regarding

registration of Dr.Sai Ravi Shankar, he has stated that he got himself

registered in APMC on 20-02-2009 for his MBBS & MD degrees only. The

Complainant contended that as per the affidavit, he is practising at

Karimnagar in Andhra Pradesh for the last six (6) years without registering

himself in APMC and he has registered himself after receiving notice from

APMC. The Committee has questioned him whether he found the respondent

guilty of un-ethical practice. He has replied that the Respondent’s practising

capability of Cardiology is not upto the mark and he observed the same with

many patients, but stated that getting all these details is not possible now.

The complainant has stated that he has registered with APMC for his MD & DM

degrees with Certificate No.12604. He has also stated that he has noticed un-

ethical practice of the Respondent, but unable to produce any evidence to that

effect. As to the further question, what made him to complain to APMC, he has

stated that patients are getting confused and the doctors also getting

confused with the degrees of the Respondent. He intends to bring this to the

notice of the Council purely to see that patients will not be affected and

patients should get proper treatment and proper advice, by properly qualified

Cardiologist.

The E&MPC has recorded the statement of the Respondent and

noted that he underwent training in DNB in Cardiology at Apollo

Hospital and he has completed his MD from SCB Medical College,

Cuttack which is recognised by MCI. He has registered himself with

APMC in the month of February, 2009. As he has registered in Orissa,

he did not know that he has to register again in Andhra Pradesh. As

to the question whether the Respondent is publishing his degrees in

press, he has stated that on his behalf his well-wisher given the

publication, but the degrees which they have published is fault on

the part of press people, for which the press has given corrigendum

on next day it self. He was asked to say any thing more and he

replied that due to his ignorance he has displayed DNB (Tr.,) which is

not recognised. He has also stated that he is not aware that DNB

Cardiology should not be displayed and prayed that he may be

pardoned for any of my lapses due to my ignorance.

The E&MPC has noted that the respondent has expressed his

ignorance and stated that he was under the impression that he is

entitled to display DNB Cardiology. The E & MPC observed that

Dr.Sai Ravi Shanker got himself registered with Andhra Pradesh

Medical Council in the month of February, 2009 whereas he is

practising in Karimnagar for the past 5 years which is contrary to the

provisions of Andhra Pradesh Medical Practitioners Registration Act,

1968. The Committee felt that his statement that ‘he registered in

Orissa and he does not know that he has to register again in Andhra

Pradesh’ is not convincing. After taking into consideration of entire

material on record and the statements made by the parties

concerned, the Ethical & Malpractices Committee observed that the

acts of the Respondent, Dr.Sai Ravi Shankar are not in conformity

with the IMC Regulations, 2002. The E & MPC has gone through the

material filed on behalf of the complainant and noted that the

respondent is displaying ‘D.Card (NIMS) & DNB Card (NIMS)’ in his

prescription pads. The E & MPC is of the view that the respondent

has not cleared DNB (Cardiology) and even if his contention that he

has obtained ‘D.Card (NIMS)’, he is not justified in using either of

these Diplomas. The Committee noted that according to IMC

Regulations- 2002, it will be unethical on the part of a Medical

Practitioner to suffix un-recognized degree/diploma to his name in his

letter pad, prescription pad or sign board. During the enquiry it was

made clear to the respondent that ‘D.Card (NIMS) is an unrecognized

diploma and using the same will be an un-ethical act on any count.

The E & MPC has taken into consideration of the view expressed by

the Complainant that ‘the respondent should not practice as

consultant Cardiologist and he should not exhibit DNB or DM in any

way’. The E & MPC has considered the further statement of the

complainant that he has noticed illegal practices done by the

respondent but unable to provide necessary evidence in this regard.

In view of the above observations and taking into consideration

of the view expressed by the complainant that he has no personal

rivalry or jealousy on the practice of the respondent, it is decided

that the respondent deserve to be warned for his un-ethical acts such

as using DNB (Cardiology) with out possessing the same and

displaying ‘D.Card (NIMS)’ which is an un-recognized qualification

and admittedly practising in Karimnagar for the past (5) Five years

but got himself registered in APMC for his MBBS as well as MD

(General Medicine) in February, 2009 consequent on registered

notice received from the Council and recommended to the Executive

Committee accordingly for taking necessary decision in this regard.

The Executive Committee in its meeting held on 01-07-2009 has

decided that ‘the Respondent deserve to be warned for his un-ethical

acts such as using DNB (Cardiology) with out possessing the same

and displaying ‘D.Card (NIMS) which is un-recognised qualification

and admittedly practising in Karimnagar for the past five year but

got himself registered in APMC for his MBBS as well as MD (General

Medicine) in February 2009 consequent on registered notice received

from the Council’

The General Body perused the entire record and gone through

the statements made by the parties concerned. The General Body has

wider discussion on this item.

Dr.K.Ramesh Reddy, Member speaking on the occasion has

expressed the view that ‘the Respondent has not registered in APMC.

His act attracts the provisions of Section-20 of A.P.Medical

Practitioners Registration Act-1968 according to which “not

withstanding anything to the contrary in any other law for the time

being in force, no person other than a registered practitioner shall,

without the previous sanction of the Government be competent to

hold any appointment as Physician, surgeon or other medical officer

in any approved institution which is supported wholly or partly out of

the funds of the State or the fund of a local authority, no certificate

required by law to be given by a medical practitioner shall be valid

unless signed by a registered practitioner” and that he is not having

sufficient recognised qualification to practice as a Cardiologist and

hence he should be punished.

Dr.E.Ravinder Reddy, Member, speaking on the occasion has

expressed that “Censure” be imposed on the Respondent for his

lapses and the un-ethical acts in which he had been indulged.

Dr.P.Sucharitha Murthy, Ex-officio Member expressed the view

that there should be strong message go to other doctors who are

indulged in such un-ethical acts and thus violating the provisions of

Code of Medical Ethics prescribed by the Medical Council of India as

notified in IMC Regulations, 2002. Dr.Hanumanlu, Joint Director

Health, representing the Ex-Officio member of the Council (Director of

Health) has expressed the view that “Censure” be imposed on the

Respondent for his lapses and the un-ethical acts in which he had

been indulged.

Dr.T.Ravi Raju, Director of Medical Education and Ex-officio

Member expressed the same view. Dr.G.Balamaddaiah, Dr.V.Ram

Prasad, Dr.S.Srinivasa Reddy, members speaking on the occasion

have expressed the view that the name of the respondent be

removed from the Medical Register for a period of three months for

the un-ethical acts committed by the respondent, Dr.A.Sai Ravi

Shankar. Dr.K.L.Sampath Kumar, Vice-Chairman, Dr.N.Kishore,

Dr.E.Ravinder Reddy and Dr.P.Sucharitha Murthy expressed the view

that “Censure” be imposed on the Respondent for his lapses and the

un-ethical acts in which he had been indulged.

Dr.G.Balamaddaiah participating the discussion once again has

expressed his further view that censure be imposed and the same

will be notified in press. Dr.K.Ramesh Reddy intervening with the

views expressed by the other members have expressed that

‘ignorance is also a wrong’. Dr.P.Sucharitha Murthy expressed her

further view that there shall be preventive measures taken through

Indian Medical Association. Dr.N.Kishore expressed his further view

and stated that ‘some doctors are ignorant – we should take action

against the erring doctors against whom complaints are received.’

The General Body came to the conclusion that it is necessary to

suspend respondent doctors against whom complaints are received

for practicing in-completed PG Degrees/PG Diplomas while displaying

as suffix to their names such PG Degrees / PG Diplomas.

The General Body perused the prescription pads issued by the

Respondent Dr.A.Sai Ravi Shankar and decided to mark the same as

Exhibit – P 1, Exhibit – P 2, Exhibit – P 3, Exhibit – P 4.

The General Body noted that the document Exhibit – “P 1”,

shows as “Dr.A.SAI RAVI SHANKER, M.D (Med) (DNB tr.)., D.Card

(NIMS., Hyd.) CONSULTANT CARDIOLOGIST”.

The document Exhibit – “P 2”, shows as “Dr.A.SAI RAVI

SHANKER, M.D (Med) (DNB tr.)., D.Card (NIMS., Hyd.) CONSULTANT

CARDIOLOGIST”.


SHANKER, M.D (Med) (DNB tr.)., D.Card (NIMS., Hyd.) CONSULTANT

CARDIOLOGIST”.


SHANKER, M.D (Med) DNB Card (NIMS., Hyd.) CONSULTANT

CARDIOLOGIST”.

The General Body came to the conclusion that the respondent is

displaying as suffix to his name the un-recognized diploma and also

displaying the DNB Card (NIMS., Hyd.) whereas it appears that he

underwent training for DNB for few months.

In this context, the General Body has perused the Indian

Medical Council (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics)

Regulations, 2002 notified in PART III-SECTION 4 of the Gazette of

India Dt: April 6, 2002 and noted that:

1. Code of Medical Ethics

B. Duties and responsibilities of the Physician in general.

1.1.1. - A Physician shall uphold the dignity and honour of his

profession.

1.4 - Display of Registration numbers

1.4.2 - Physicians shall display as suffix to their names only

recognized

medical degrees or such certificates/diplomas and

memberships/honors which confer professional

knowledge or recognizes any exemplary

qualification/achievements.

CHAPTER-7

7. MISCONDUCT:- The following acts of commission or omission on

the part of a physician shall constitute professional misconduct rendering

him/her liable for disciplinary action.

7.1 Violation of the Regulations: - If he/she commits any violation

of these Regulations.

7.3 If he/she does not display the registration number accorded to

him/her by the State Medical Council or the Medical Council of India in his

clinic, prescriptions and certificates etc. issued by him or violates the

provisions of regulation 1.4.2.

CHAPTER-8

8. PUNISHMENT AN DISCIPLINARY ACTION

8.1 It must be clearly understood that the instances of offences and of

Professional misconduct which are given above do not constitute and are not

intended to constitute a complete list of the infamous acts which calls for

disciplinary action and that by issuing this notice the Medical Council of India

and/or State Medical Councils are in no way precluded from considering and

dealing with any other form of professional misconduct on the part of a

registered practitioner. Circumstances may and do arise from time to time in

relation to which there may occur questions of professional misconduct which

do not come within any of these categories. Every care should be taken that

the code is not violated in letter or spirit. In such instances as in all others, the

Medical Council of India and / or State Medical Council’s have to consider and

decide upon the facts brought before the Medical Council of India and / or

State Medical Councils.

8.2 It is made clear that any complaint with regard to professional

misconduct can be brought before the appropriate Medical Council for

Disciplinary action. The appropriate Medical Council would hold an enquiry and

give opportunity to the registered medical practitioner to be heard in person

or by pleader. If the medical practitioner is found to be guilty of committing

professional misconduct, the appropriate Medical Council may award such

punishment as deemed necessary or may direct the removal altogether or for

a specified period, from the register of the name of the delinquent registered

practitioner. Deletion from the Register shall be widely publicized in local

press as well as in the publications of different Medical

Associations/Societies/Bodies.

The General Body noted that according to regulation 1.4.2 “Physicians

shall display Physicians shall display as suffix to their names only recognized

medical degrees or such certificates/diplomas and memberships/honors which

confer professional knowledge or recognizes any exemplary

qualification/achievements”.

The General Body also noted that according to regulation 8.1

“Every Care should be taken that the code is not violated in letter or

spirit” and according to regulation 8.2 “If the medical practitioner is

found to be guilty of committing professional misconduct, the

appropriate Medical Council may award such punishment as deemed

necessary or may direct the removal altogether or for a specified

period, from the register of the name of the delinquent registered

practitioner. Deletion from the Register shall be widely publicized in

local press as well as in the publications of different Medical

Associations/Societies/Bodies”.

In view of the foregone provisions, the General Body came to

the conclusion that the case of this respondent i.e. Dr.A.Sai Ravi

Shankar is a fit case where it is necessary for the Council to award

such punishment as deemed necessary. Accordingly, the General

Body came to unanimous conclusion that the name of Dr.A.Sai Ravi

Shankar (bearing registration No.62534) be removed from the

Medical Register as per provisions of Section-17 (2) r/w Sectopm-15

(4) of Andhra Pradesh Medical Practitioners Registration Act-1968 for

a period of one month from the date of communication made by the

office in this regard. It is also decided to direct the respondent to

surrender his original registration certificates of MBBS as well as MD

(General Medicine) in accordance with Section 17 (5) of the Act.

It is also decided to communicate the same to the Registrar,

Orissa Council of Medical Registration for necessary action at their

end.

Then the General Body has considered the Observations/

recommendations of the Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee in Case

No.12/2008 – complaint made by Mrs.Ramalingeswari Devi against

Dr.P.Aruna, Aruna Nursing Home, Hyderabad.

The General Body noted that the Ethical & Mal-Practices

Committee after detailed discussion and taking into consideration of

the material available on record made the following

observations/recommendations:

“ The complainant, Smt.Ramalingeswari Devi in her complaint alleged

that “After conceiving the pregnancy, she visited Dr.Aruna Hospital for

consultation that she used to go every month for check up, she had

undergone scanning in the month of 03-02-2007 at DBR Diagnosis at

Dilsuknagar, Hyderabad. After completion of 8 months, doctor has refused the

case to take up until delivery. The doctor advised her that she is not going to

take the case and the reason she said is that the patient is HB + for that, her

hospital is not equipped to counter this problem. Until 8 months, doctor said

that the baby condition is good. After 8 months all the difficulties started.

After doctor declined to take up the case we went to Fernandez Hospital at

Abids, Hyderabad. Then they went to Dr.Kasturi. She has taken the case and

advised the patient to undergo scanning. In scanning, they found that the

baby body is not grown properly and they said that the baby to going short. In

the month June 13, I delivered female baby with multiple anomalies. They

have taken baby to Aruna Hospital to know the facts about the case. The

doctor refused to give proper reply on this and according to her husband the

doctor has every right to reject the case at any time without giving any

reason. Is it true! If a lay man faces this type of situation, where the patient

has to go. Is the way Dr.Aruna treats the patient. They went to police station

to lodge a complaint against doctor, but they have refused to take up the

case. The baby lived for 3 months with so many problems and last she passed

away on 13th Sept. 2007. Due to negligence on the part of doctor and

diagnosis centre, they have lost baby and there is no value for the same. She

has stated that they have taken the baby to Rainbow Hospital and kept the

baby under observation for 2 days; the hospital authorities have also do not

have solutions to the problems that baby is facing. Even Insurance Company

has not paid the expenses for the baby and declined the expenditure occurs

during the treatment, the reason is that the baby was born with so many

anomalies and there is no coverage for this”.

As per the notice issued in this regard, the respondent filed her reply

affidavit duly denying the allegations made against her. In her reply affidavit

she has stated that ‘the complainant came to my hospital for ante-natal care

as an outpatient till 32 weeks of pregnancy, the last consultation being on 05-

05-2007, that she was advised to come after 2 weeks for a review. But she did

not come and as stated by the complainant she went to Fernandez Hospital,

Hyderabad and delivered a child with congenital anomalies’ She has further

stated that “It is not true that the doctor refused to continue Medical Care on

the ground of Patient being HBSAg Positive as alleged by her since she was

under my care even after being detected positive” She concluded her reply

requesting the A.P.Medical Council not to consider the false allegations made

against her.

As per the decision in this regard, both the parties have

appeared before the Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee on

30.04.2009. The husband of the complainant requested for

adjournment of hearing on the ground that they have received the

notice on 29.04.2009. Accordingly, the hearing of the case has been

adjourned to 26-05-2009. The Complainant, Smt. Mrs.Ramalingeswari

Devi appeared before the Committee and her statement is on record.

(Pages: 196 & 197 of material papers)

The respondent, Dr.P.Aruna appeared before the committee and

her statement is on record. (Pages: 197 & 198 of material papers)

The E&MPC noted that as per the direction given in this regard,

Dr.Aruna has submitted evidence to show that she has taken up

Hbs.Ag Positive cases for delivery and Caesarean Sections.

The Ethical & Mal Practices Committee on the basis of material

available on record and taking into consideration of the statements

made by the parties concerned, observed that there is no negligence

on the part of Dr.P.Aruna in treating the Complainant, Mrs.

C.Ramalingeswari and recommends to the Executive Committee

accordingly.

The Executive Committee considered this item in its meeting

held on 01.07.2009 and approved the observations/recommendations

of the Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee.

The General Body taking into consideration of the material

available on record and the statements made by the parties

concerned and the observations/recommendations of the Ethical &

Mal-Practices Committee as approved by the Executive Committee

has decided that there is no negligence on the part of the respondent

Dr.P.Aruna in treating the patient/ complainant,

Mrs.C.Ramalingeswari Devi at Aruna Hospital, Hyderabad.

Then the General Body has considered the

observations/recommendations of the E&MPC in Case.No.13/2008, i.e.

the complaint made by Mr.Ravinder Dwivedi against Dr.Sunil Kapoor

of Care Hospital, Hyderabad. The General Body noted that the

complainant has not attended for the hearing, though Regd. A/D

notice was sent to him. The General Body noted that:

Sri Ravinder Dwivedi, in his complaint made to the Hon’ble Minister of

State, Home Affairs, Government of India, has stated that All India Anti

Corruption Committee is an NGO working in all over India against corruption,

atrocities, irregularities, misuse of the post and power and that the Committee

received many written complainants against Care Hospital, Nampally,

Hyderabad. He has alleged that ‘one by name Laxmi Bai, aged 88 years

admitted in Care Hospital on 15.10.2007 at around 02.00 PM as she was not

feeling well, Dr.Sunil Kapoor under whom the patient admitted did not bother

to visit the patient till 16.10.2007. Only Junior Doctor attended after admission

in A.M.C. Dr.Sunil Kapoor did not attend the patient. When the grandson

namely, Mr.Shyam came to know when he visited the Hospital in person and

tried to find out what treatment is being given to the patient and asked the

Medical Prescription, then the duty Junior Doctor refused to give and they

asked to contact Dr.Sunil Kapoor only in this matter. After lot of efforts, Mr.

Sham met Dr.Sunil Kapoor and he told him that patient’s respiratory system

completely collapsed for that he asked him to deposit Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees

One Lakh Only) and then only he will start treatment. When Mr. Sham asked

about the type of medical prescription, Dr.Sunil Kapoor became angry and

abused him in filthy language and warned to take his patient back and

prepared a false discharge report and bill for an amount of Rs.13,892/-. Lastly

relatives of the patient shifted her to another hospital by name Woodland

Hospital, Barkathpura, Hyderabad wherein proper care and attention was paid

by the Doctor and patient recovered there and feeling more comfortable.’

He has further stated that on receipt of the complaint, committee has

verified this matter and contended that all the allegations made against

Dr.Sunil Kapoor are true and correct. He alleged that not only Care Hospital

was topper in mis-utilization of CGHS Funds and they are also collecting huge

amount from the relatives of the patient on false tests and treatment. He

further contended that they are harassing the patient in different ways and

prayed and requested to look in to the matter and take stringent action

against Dr.Sunil Kapoor and save the patients.

The under Secretary to Government of Indian, Ministry of H&FW in his

letter dt:30.05.2008 addressed a letter to the Health Secretary Govt. of

Andhra Pradesh and a copy of the same has been marked to the Secretary,

MCI, New Delhi. The Secretary MCI in his letter dt: 04.08.2008 forwarded the

said complaint to Andhra Pradesh Medical Council and requested to

investigate and take necessary action in the matter.

As per the notice issued the Respondent, Dr.Sunil Kapoor has submitted

his detailed explanation and stated that “Mrs.Leela Bai Nainani 88 years old

lady was brought to the hospital with severe breathlessness to emergency

room of Care Hospital. (i) She was attended to by the Casualty Medical Officer,

Cardiology, DMO, who are experienced and not junior doctors as falsely

alleged (ii) At care Hospital experienced doctors like Cardiologists, Cardiac

Surgeons, anesthesiologists who are seniors and experienced are available

round the clock. After initial treatment in E.R. and AMC, the patient’s

condition improved. (iii) The attendant of the patient deposited Rs.15,000/-

and not Rs.1,00,000/- as falsely alleged (iv)Mr. Sham spoke to Dr.Sunil Kapoor

on his mobile phone late at night asked for immediate appointment, the

doctor explained the condition of the patient and told the attendant not to

travel, which he said he was doing. The doctor told that all reports will be

coming by 10.30 A.M. and he asked Mr.Sham to meet him at 11.00 AM. (v) All

Hematological, Bio-chemical, ECG, Chest X-Ray, Blood Oxygen reports were

evaluated and patient was put on Oxygen and CPAP and other medications.

The doctor explained Mr.Sham that primarily the lungs of the patient were

week and also lungs specialist was informed. Dr.Sunanda, Lungs Specialist has

seen the patient and also advised Mr.Sham. It was also told to Mr.Sham that

since it was primarily lung problem he can also discuss with lungs specialist

Dr.Sunanda. After discussing the patient’s problem with Dr.Sunanda, Mr.Sham

said that he wants to take the patient to another specialist in another hospital.

Hence, the patient was discharged and ambulance was arranged by the

hospital and the patient was taken to another hospital by the Hospital

Ambulance with Oxygen and treatment being delivered on the way. (vi) The

total bill including investigations, bed charges, treatment etc amounted to

Rs.13,982/- and the consultations with specialists amounted to only

Rs.1,100/-. An amount of Rs.1,108/- was refunded, by the billing department

of the hospital. (vii) The amounts deposited with the billing department, the

PRE deals with this and the doctors are in no way concerned with billing

matters, as they are busy in attending to sick patients. (viii)The hospital bill is

being provided as proof. The Respondent, Dr.Sunil Kapoor has contended that

all the allegations are false, mischievous and made without any proof and

defamatory.


parties, to appear before the committee.

The Respondent, Dr.Sunil Kapoor appear before the committee

and his statement is on record. (Pages No.152&153 of material papers).

The E&MPC noted that the Case-sheet pertaining to the patient,

Mrs.Laxmi Bai has not been submitted. As per the direction given in this

regard, Dr.Sunil Kapoor submitted the case sheet pertaining to the patient,

Mrs.Laxmi Bai.

After taking into the consideration of the entire material on record, the

statement made by the respondent, Dr.Sunil Kapoor and on perusal of copy of

the case sheet provided by him, the committee came to the conclusion that

there was no negligence on the part of Dr.Sunil Kapoor in treating the patient

Mrs.Laxmi Bai. The E&MPC as admittedly noted that the patient was shifted to

another hospital and recovered there.

The Executive Committee considered this item in its meeting

held on 01-07-2009 has approved the observations/recommendations

of the Ethical & Mal Practices Committee.

The General Body after taking into consideration of the material

available and the statements made by the Respondent and the

observations/recommendations of the Ethical & Mal-Practices

Committee as approved by the Executive Committee has decided that

there is no negligence on the part of the respondent Dr.Sunil Kapoor

in treating the patient, Mrs.Laxmi Bai (aged 88 years) at Care

Hospital, Nampally, Hyderabad.

E&MPC Meeting Dated: 28.07.2009

E. Then the General Body has taken up for consideration of the

Minutes of the Ethical & Mal-Practices Committed dated 28-07-2009.

The General Body noted that the Ethical & Mal Practices Committee

has recorded the statement of the Respondent in Case No.01/2009,

the statement of the Complainant in Case No.02/2009. The General

Body noted that the E&MPC made its observations in Case

No.18/2008 and 23/2008. The General Body also noted that the

E&MPC considered Case No.22/2008, Case No.17/2008, Case

No.20/2008, Case No.21/2008, Case No.19/2008, Case No.16/2008,

Case No. 03/2009, Case No.08/2009, Case No.09/2009 for taking


CASE NO.18/2008:- Complaint made by Sri M.G.Ramulu Yadav against

Dr. Vishnu Vardhan Reddy, Zaheerabad.

The General Body noted that the Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee

made the following observations / recommendations:

The E&MPC has gone through the complaint and noted that the

complainant has alleged that “Dr.M.Vishnu Vardhan Reddy is running a Private

Orthopaedic Nursing Home and he does not possess any degree in

Orthopaedics. He is also running Sai Diagnostics and also working in Govt.

Hospital, Zaheerabad. He has done several operations in Private and

Government Hospitals, without possessing orthopaedic degree and the

patients are suffering a lot”. He has requested for taking appropriate action

against him.

As per the notice issued in this regard, the respondent has filed his reply

affidavit stating that the complainant Mr.Ramulu Yadav developed political

grudge on account of the reckless conduct with senior leaders of TDP and in

fact, the district leader who is active presently in TDP was earlier elected as

MLA from Congress party from Zaheerabad assembly segment is related to

the complainant. He contended that to wreck vengeance against the senior

leader he is making the complainant to use as his tool, to extract favouritism

and trying to indulge in all mud-slinging acts to blemish the professional

reputation and added to above, some doctors working in Government Hospital

at Zaheerabad, maintaining separate clinics have also developed professional

jealous. He contended that he has never been indulged in any professional

mis-conduct, irregularities or etiquette or not violated any professional ethics.

As per the Summons issued in this regard, the Respondent,

Dr.M.Vishnu Vardhan Reddy appeared before the Committee and his

statement is on record. (Pages: 220 & 221 of material papers)

Later, the complainant, Sri M.G.Ramulu Yadav present himself

alongwith his Counsel and submitted an application requesting the

Council to permit withdrawal of his complaint on the ground that

originals of xerox copies enclosed to his complaint are missing and

not traceable despite of all his sincere efforts. He has further stated

that politicians have developed grudge over Dr.M.V.Reddy and

misguided him. He has also stated that in the present circumstances

and after careful consideration of Legal Opinion, he felt it necessary

to seek the Council’s permission for withdrawal of his complaint,

which is pending for an enquiry stating that he is withdrawing the

Complaint made by him against Dr.M.Vishnu Vardhan Reddy.

After taking into consideration of the statement made by the

respondent, Dr.M.Vishnu Vardhan Reddy, wherein he has denied the

allegations made against him and the application of the complaint

stating that he is withdrawing the complaint, it is decided that if he

is found henceforth practising as Orthopedic Surgeon, action will be

contemplated. It is also decided that the observation of the Executive

Committee will be taken into consideration and the name of

respondent’s hospital to carryout joint inspection by CME Committee,

Ethical & Mal Practices Committee and Legal & Anti-Quackery

Committee will be included at an appropriate time.


considered this item and decided to approve the

observations/recommendations of the Ethical & Mal-Practices

Committee.

Then the General Body has considered the entire material on

record and decided to treat the complaint as withdrawn. It is also

decided that the respondent be warned not to practice as

Orthopaedic Surgeon hence forth. It is also decided that the name of

respondent’s hospital to carryout joint inspection by the CME

Committee, Ethical & Mal Practices Committee and Legal & Anti-

Quackery Committee will be included at an appropriate time.

E&MPC Meeting Dated:08.09.2009:-

F. Then the General Body has considered the Minutes of the

Ethical & Mal Practices Committee dated 08-09-2009. The General

Body noted that the E & MPC has considered Case

No.01/2009,02/2009,03/2009,04/2009,08/2009,09/2009, Cases

No.15/2009–18/2009, Case

No.16/2008,17/2008,19/2008,20/2008,21/2008,22/2008,02/2008,07/20

08. The General Body noted that in Case No.03/2009 and Case

Nos.08/2009, 16/2008 the E&MPC recorded the statements of the

parties concerned and in Case No.09/2009. The E&MPC recorded the

statements of the Complainant and Respondent’s Counsel. The

General Body noted that inspite of the summons issued in this

regard, the Complainant in Case No.19/2008 did not appear before

the E & MPC and in other cases, the E & MPC has decided to take


Case No.17/2008:-

In the complaint made by Sri Kalluri Adinarayana against

Dr.Garikapati Subba Rao, the General Body noted that the

Complainant in his complaint dated 09-09-2008 has alleged that

Dr.Garikapati Subba Rao(MBBS) is running his Nursing Home and

practising for the last 30 years and in his hands number of patients

died. He has alleged that his, Smt. Kalluri Subbayamma is one

among them. He has further alleged having noticed the corrupt

practices of the said doctor, such as selling medicines without any

license and earning lakhs of rupees and the same has been

complained to the authorities of Commercial Tax Department.

The complainant has further alleged that as per GO No.135, there are

certain standards to be observed. There are no trained Nurses or

Compounders and the names of persons who are working as Compounders

have been furnished to the DM&HO. X-Ray Machine is there and has been in

use but for the past several years. Scanning Machine is there and Scanning

has been done by the doctor for several patients and the Respondent has

permitted Sri A.M.Rao to run Medical Shop and there is no Pharmacist. The

Complainant has contended that the Respondent is dispensing medicines

without proper accounts and records and he is having sufficient evidence to

prove the same. As per the decision taken in this regard, the complainant was

requested to file his complaint in the form of an affidavit as per APMC Rules,

1978. He submitted his complaint as per the Rules. As per the notice issued in

this regard, the respondent, Dr.Garikapati Subba Rao filed his reply affidavit

wherein he has stated that he is running the Nursing Home at Edlapadu. He

has also stated that the allegation with regard to the death of Kalluri

Subbayamma wife of the complainant, it is totally false and concocted for the

purpose of blackmailing him thereby to get huge amounts from him. He has

also stated that Smt. Kalluri Subbayamma was died at St.Joseph’s Hospital,

Guntur on 19.10.2007 but not in his nursing home as alleged.

He has stated that his Nursing Home is situated at a corner of a village

and he faced lot of problems in the course of treatment and hence dispensed

the required drugs to his patients only. He has stated that as a doctor, he is

exempted from taking drug license u/s K (5) Drugs and Cosmetics Act to

dispense the drugs to his patients only on no profit – no loss basis.

He has stated that he has paid Turn Over Tax to CTO Chilakaluripeta

under protest. He has contended that he has dispensed the medicines to his

patients only and as per the direction of the CTO, Chilakaluripeta he has paid

Rs.34,860/- whereas the actual tax was only Rs.12,866/- for four years. He

contended that the authorities never alleged “theft of energy” or “tampering

with meter. As to the allegations with regard to G.O.Ms.No.135, he has stated

that the process of registration of nursing homes in the district is going on. He

has applied for Registration of his Nursing Home. The respondent has stated

that the complainant is harassing and threatening the officers to take action

against him though there is no fault from his side and the complainant is a

habitual petition-monger.

He has stated that his nursing home is small one and he is only a graduate

and he personally attends those few patients who will come to him. Trained

nurses and compounders are not readily available as his income is small and

the village is small. He has stated that he has engaged one MPHW and still in

search of qualified person and three women possessing GNM qualification will

come to work in his Nursing Home from January, 2009. He contended that

they will assist him but won’t extend their services to the patients. With

regard to the X-Ray Plant, he has stated that the same is run by an

independent technician and he is a qualified one. He is running his Laboratory

in a room taken on rental basis and the respondent is not concerned with the

same. With regard to Ultra Sound Scanning machine, he has stated that he is

qualified and obtained permission from DM&HO, Guntur as required under law.

He has stated that he is not concerned with the Medical Shop and the owner

has obtained Drug License from the concerned Inspector of Drugs and is

running the shop independently.

With regard to the press clippings dt.15-09-2008, he has stated that the

allegation is totally false and he never used to draw blood in his nursing home.

He contended that the paper clipping and the photo goes to show that it was

snapped un-noticedly without anybody’s permission. The X-ray plant can also

be seen in the photograph and the respondent is not concerned with the

laboratory and its maintenance. He has further stated that he came to know

that no drawal of blood took place as alleged and the technician Mohan

Gandhi stated that whenever a patient is unable to step on to the table for X-

ray, somebody will help him; this photograph was taken on such one occasion

with a malafide intention, perhaps by the complainant himself. He contended

that the entire story was concocted by the complainant with the help of the

Reporter of the Andhra Jyothi, who is none other than his relative.


parties to appear before the Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee on 26-06-

2009.00 The Complainant did not appear, but the respondent, Dr.G.Subba Rao

has appeared before the Committee and his statement is on record. (Pages:

170 & 171 of material papers)

On 28.07.2009 complainant, Sri Kalluri Adinarayana Rao appeared before

E&MPC. His statement is on record.

The Ethical & Mal Practices Committee has once again gone through the

entire material on record and the statements made by both parties, came to

the following conclusions:

(i) There is no negligence on the part of the Respondent Dr.G.Subba Rao

in treating the patient.

(ii) After going through the record, it is evident that the respondent has

referred the patient to higher centre.

(iii) The death has not occurred in the Hospital of the Respondent.

(iv) The Respondent is a qualified person.

(v) The Respondent has not preserved or prescribed spurious medicines;

the report of the Drug Inspector in this regard makes it clear.

(vi) The Respondent has got his nursing home registered under Clinical

Establishment Act and as per the evidence produced by him in this

regard, it is clear that the Respondent has not violated the guidelines

issued by the State Government in G.O.Ms.No.135.

In view of the foregoing conclusions and in view of the fact that the

Respondent has not indulged in any un-ethical act as alleged by the

Complainant Sri Kalluri Adinarayana, the Ethical & Mal Practices Committee

concluded that the allegations made by the Complainant are not proved. The

E & MPC recommended accordingly to the Executive Committee for necessary

decision in this regard.

The Executive Committee in its meeting held on 22-10-2009 has approved

the observations/recommendations of the E&MPC.

The General Body taking into consideration of material on record together

with statements of parties concerned and the observations/recommendations

of the E&MPC as approved by the Executive Committee has decided to

approve the same. The General Body came to the conclusion that there is no

negligence on the part of the Respondent Dr.G.Subba Rao in treating the

patient and as per the record, it is evident that the respondent has referred

the patient to higher centre and the death has not occurred in the Hospital of

the Respondent. Moreover, the Respondent is a qualified person. As per the

available records, the Respondent has not preserved or prescribed spurious

medicines; as per the evidence produced by him, he got his nursing home

registered under Clinical Establishment Act and as such he has not violated

the guidelines issued by the State Government in G.O.Ms.No.135.

The General Body approved the action taken by the Ethical & Mal Practices

Committee in its meeting held on 08-09-2009 in other cases.

E&MPC Meeting Dated:22-10-2009:-

G. Then the General Body has considered the Minutes of the

Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee dated 22-10-2009.

The General Body noted that the E & MPC has considered Case

No.01/2009, 02/2009, 03/2009, 08/2009, Case No.15/2009, 16/2009,

20/2008, 21/2008, 22/2008, 02/2008, 07/2008.

The General Body noted that in Case No.01/2009 the

complainant did not appear before the committee on 22.10.2009

inspite of three notices issued in this regard. The E&MPC on the basis

of material available on record has made its detailed

observations/recommendations.

In Case No.02/2009 the respondent was absent and the E&MPC

has considered the representation of his counsel.

In Case No.03/2009 the E&MPC in its meeting held on

08.09.2009 has permitted the respondent, Dr.Sameer Diwale to file

Additional Affidavit and other material and the E&MPC has

considered the same in the meeting held on 22.10.2009 for making

its detailed observations/recommendations.

In Case No.08/2009 the E&MPC made its detailed


In Case No.20/2008, the complaint made by Ms.L.Suvarna

against Dr.S.V.Adinarayana Rao, it has been decided to close the

case in the absence of further complaint from the complainant.

In Case No.21/2009, the E&MPC has obtained legal opinion of

the Standing Counsel of APMC. The Standing Counsel has advised

that the matter be kept in abeyance in respect of proceeding

initiated against Dr.V.Murali Mohan Rao until final disposal of

W.P.No.18733/2009 by the Hon’ble High Court. The Standing Counsel

also advised that summons be issued to other respondent i.e.

Dr.Sudha Ramana directing her to appear before the E&MPC in its

next meeting.

In Case No.16/2009, the E&MPC made its detailed


(i) Case No.01/2009:- The complaint made by Sri.K.Prasad against

Dr.Srinivas Bathini, Ongole.

The General Body noted that the complainant, Sri K.Prasad made a

complaint against Dr.Srinivas Bathini, Sarada Children’s Hospital, Ongole. The

members have noted that the complainant in his complaint has stated that

“they had a baby on 17th January, 2009 and it was a caesarian at a small town

i.e. Kandukur and the local doctor advised him to take the baby to a Diabetic

checkup, (keeping in mind that the baby’s grandparents have diabetes) to

Ongole immediately after birth and referred to Dr.Srinivas Bathini, M.D.

(Paediatrics), MRCPCH (U.K.) of Sarada Children’s Hospital. The mother and

father of the baby are not diabetic. The baby’s cry was normal and had no

convulsions. The doctor was telling every one who visited the baby that he

had brought down the sugar levels from 2000 without giving any insulin,

which the complainant feels is not possible. He was also not willing to test the

baby for serum bilrubin even after repeated requests. The complainant felt

that the doctor was trying to retain the baby for more number of days in the

hospital and misguided us with the 2000 mg/ dl report and was not willing to

test serum bilrubin. The 211 report could also been taken when the IV was

administered. The complainant contended whether Neonatal Jaundice require

hospitalization in ICU for four days and is the 2020 mg/dl blood sugar report

correct? “.

The Respondent, Dr.Srinivas Bathini has submitted his explanation and

stated that on 17th January, 2009 the Baby was brought to Sharada Children’s

Hospital, Ongole on the advice of Dr.Aluri Prabhakar Rao who suspected

‘Neonatal Diabetes’ and requested him to do diabetic screening keeping in

view the genetic predisposition for diabetes, as both the baby’s grandparents

were known diabetics. He has stated that the first sample report had a reading

of 2020mg/dl (17.01.2009) which is by all means an abnormal reading which

also had been cross checked & concurred by another lab which too gave an

abnormal reading of 1690mg/dl.

He contended that with such high readings the clinical condition of the

baby should have been worse than the then exact prevailing condition of the

baby and stated that in day to day practice they come across false positive,

false negative and some abnormal report too. He has further stated that the

new born baby with diabetes can have hyperglycemia, acidaemia,

dehydration. After further clinical observation of the baby, they administered

supportive care in the form of maintenance intravenous fluids, continued

warmer care, inj.vitamin k stat dose, inj.fortum 125 mg bid, inj. zinetac 5 units

bid, 30 ml of oral feeds 2nd hourly in the form of lactogen1. With the above

treatment, the baby’s clinical condition was stable for the next 48 hours.

During the process of observation and supportive care on day 3 the baby

developed neonatal physiological jaundice which was assessed clinically by

Crammer’s method and was put on to phototherapy in consonance to the

guidelines. The Baby’s general condition was stable and with phototherapy

treatment the condition of physiological jaundice had started improving

clinically. The physiological jaundice started declining from day 5 and was out

of phototherapy zone on the 6th day of life.

He has concluded that the complainant has marked the subject of his

complaint as ‘Neonatal Diabetes measuring 2020 mg/dl’, it is exactly and

rightly because of this 2020 mg/dl, that he had to embark on this particular

treatment as explained above. Having thus tabled an exhaustive report as to

the facts and exigencies dealt with in relation to the case and he expressed

that the committee perceives the case in its entirety considering the fragility

and all factors and regimens backed by respective established and widely

followed references. He has enclosed certain references on which he relied

upon.

He has further stated that it is perplexing to note that despite the baby

being discharged from the hospital in a hale & healthy condition and who

continues to be in the pink of health even to this day (six months after being

discharged), it is unfortunate to have such allegations leveled against a

successful, methodical & professional treatment of the neonate.

He contended that the complainant being a medical non-expert

misinterpreted his treatment process. He has also stated that all analysis,

decision making and treatment have been done with utmost regard to the

oath taken by the medical fraternity and in tune to his conscience.

The General Body also noted that as per the decision taken in this

regard summons were issued to the complainant to appear before the E&MPC

for 3 times. The General Body noted that the E&MPC in its meeting held on

22.10.2009 sought for the opinion of the Standing Counsel of APMC who was

present. He expressed the view that as per rules, the E&MPC may take

necessary decision in this matter. The General Body noted that the

respondent was present before the E&MPC on 28.07.2009. The members have

gone through the following statement of the respondent.

The Statement of Respondent Dr.Bathini Srinivas

1. Since how many years you are practicing at Ongole?

Ans. From past 2 years.

2. What is your qualification and where you completed?

Ans. M.D (Paediatrics), J.J.M.Medical College, Davanagere recognized

by Medical Council of

India.

3. Have you registered your MBBS & MD (Paediatrics) with APMC? Where

you did your MBBS and your P.G. Degree?

Ans. No, MBBS from Bangalore University (Sri Devaraj Urs Medical

College, Kolar) and M.D (Paediatrics), J.J.M.Medical College,

Davanagere recognized by Medical Council of India.

4. Do you know that with out registration in APMC you are not suppose to

practice in Andhra Pradesh?

Ans. As I was practicing in Karnataka State for the past 10 years and

registered at KPMC, I was in an opinion that if I was registered

in one state we can practice any where in the country as my

both the degrees were recognized by MCI.

5. What is the MRCPCH (UK) which was prescribed on your prescription

pad? Did you get that MRCPCH Degree?

Ans. Member in Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (UK).

Doing the course.

6. Have you passed MRCPCH or appearing for examination?

Ans. Appearing for examination.

7. What was the condition of the baby at the time of admission?

Ans. The baby was Lethargic, Hypothermic and Hypoperfused.

8. Whether these findings recorded in Case Sheet or not?

Ans. No.

9. Whether the baby was there as in-patient or not?

Ans. Yes.

10. What are the investigations advised by you at the time of admission?

Ans. Random Blood Sugar levels.

11. What was the clinical diagnosis at the time of admission? Did you

suspect Neonatal Diabetes at the time of admission?

Ans. Hypothermia, Neonatal Diabetes was not suspected at the time

of admission.

12. What made you to keep the baby as inpatient for 6 days?

Ans. Abnormal Random Blood Sugar Level reports and Neonatal

Physiological

Jaundice.

13. Do you think that very high report of Blood Sugar i.e. 2020 is because of

the wrongly sent blood sample or wrong reporting of the Lab or the baby

really suspected diabetes?

Ans. The baby was not really suspecting diabetes. Hence we had not

started on

Insulin therapy. The abnormal reports may be due to either

wrong reporting

of the Lab or may be due to any contamination.

14. Did you enclose the report of the other lab which cross checked with

first lab report?

Ans. No.

15. Where is the Case Sheet? What about the Jaundice?

Ans. Available (will be produced within three weeks). The Neonatal

Physiological

Jaundice was diagnosed clinically on 3rd day of life and was

started on photo therapy.

16. Why do you think that the patient complaint against you?

Ans. Because of the abnormal lab reports the complainant was in the

opinion that I have hidden the truths regarding the case.

17. Do you got evidence to say that this type of picture can present in

normal baby?

Ans. Yes, according to various reputed medical text book references.

18. Why Serum Bilrubin was not done even after repeated requests made by

the complainants?

Ans. Because already the baby had undergone repeated

investigations for Blood

Sugar levels, I had hesitated to do Serum Bilrubin levels to

maintain

Hemoglobin Percentage as the Physiological Jaundice can also

be clinically

diagnosed.

19. How many days you can keep the Neonatal Baby in ICU for Jaundice?

Ans. 2 to 3 days.

20. Do you accept that you have committed mistake in keeping the baby as

inpatient, mis-diagnosis and wrong treatment?

Ans. No. As the patient is very well known to the referring doctor,

the referring

doctor had requested me to take good care of the baby and rule

out Neonatal Diabetes. I had tried to give the best care in these

circumstances even though the reports were very abnormal.

SD/DR.SRINIVAS BATHINI,

RESPONDENT

The E&MPC after careful consideration of the material available

on record and the statement made by the respondent Dr.Bathini

Srinivas has come to the following conclusions:

(i) He did not maintain proper records (Case Sheet).

(ii) At the time of hearing, the Committee directed him for

submission of records for the perusal of the Committee.

(iii) Inspite of insistence in this regard, he did not submit the

required records.

(iv) The Committee noted that the respondent is displaying the

degree of MRCPCH which he has not yet completed. As

seen from his own statement, he is doing the course and

appearing for the examination to be conducted by Royal

College of Paediatrics and Child Health (UK).

(v) In view of the foregone conclusions, the Committee is of

the opinion that the respondent, Dr.Bathini Srinivas be

warned for non maintaining proper records; he shall also

be warned for non submission of records to APMC inspite

of insistence for the same by the Committee. The

Committee is of the opinion that he shall be warned for

displaying the degree which he has not yet completed,

since displaying such degree is an un-ethical act and the

respondent doctor thereby violated the Code of Ethics

incorporated in IMC Regulations 2002. The E&MPC also

decided that the respondent, Dr.Bathini Srinivas be

warned not to repeat such things in future.

The observations/recommendations of the Ethical & Mal-

Practices Committee were placed before the Executive Committee on

22.10.2009 (03.00 PM).

The Executive Committee after taking into consideration of the

entire material on record and taking into consideration of the

observations/recommendations of the E&MPC has decided to approve

the same.

The General Body noted that the respondent, Dr.Srinivas Bathini

has not submitted relevant records as insisted by the E&MPC. The

General Body noted that in the discharge summary he has displayed

to suffix his name, the Degrees of ‘MD Ped. MRCPCH (UK), Consultant

Neonatologist & Paediatric Intensivist ’. The members have noted

that as per the statement made by the respondent before the E&MPC

the ‘MRCPCH (UK)’ stands for Member in Royal College of Paediatrics

and Child Health (UK). The Members also noted that he is doing the

course at present and appearing for the examination. The Members

have gone through the provisions of IMC Regulations and noted that

according to Clause 1.4.2 of the regulations “Physicians shall display

as suffix to their names only recognized medical degrees or such

certificates/diplomas and memberships/honors which confer

professional knowledge or recognizes any exemplary

qualification/achievements”. In view of the said provisions

Dr.K.Ramesh Reddy, Member expressed the view that we should

write to General Medical Council informing them about this doctor

displaying the in-completed degree. Taking into consideration of the

fact that the doctor is displaying an in-complete degree and thereby

misleading the general public as well as members of medical

fraternity. Thus he has violated the provisions of IMC Regulations

2002.

The members have also noted that as to the question, did he

enclose the report of the other lab which cross-checked with first lab

report, he has replied “No”. As to the further question, “Where is

the Case Sheet? What about the Jaundice?”. He has replied that

“Available (will be produced within three weeks). The Neonatal

Physiological Jaundice was diagnosed clinically on 3rd day of life and

was started on photo therapy”.

The members noted that inspite of assurance given by him to

submit the case-sheet, the respondent doctor has kept himself silent

and did not submit the same to the Council. The members have also

noted that the respondent doctor has got himself registered in APMC

recently whereas he is practicing in AP for the last few years which is

contrary to the provisions of Section-20 of A.P.Medical Practitioners

Registration Act, 1968.

In this context, the members have gone through the following

provisions of the IMC Regulations, 2002.

2. Code of Medical Ethics

C. Duties and responsibilities of the Physician in general.

2.1.1. - A Physician shall uphold the dignity and honour of his

profession.

1.4 - Display of Registration numbers

1.4.2 - Physicians shall display as suffix to their names only

recognized

medical degrees or such certificates/diplomas and

memberships/honors which confer professional knowledge or

recognizes any exemplary qualification/achievements.

CHAPTER-7

7. MISCONDUCT:- The following acts of commission or omission on

the part of a physician shall constitute professional misconduct rendering

him/her liable for disciplinary action.

7.1 Violation of the Regulations:- If he/she commits any violation

of these Regulations.

7.3 If he/she does not display the registration number accorded to

him/her by the State Medical Council or the Medical Council of India in his

clinic, prescriptions and certificates etc. issued by him or violates the

provisions of regulation 1.4.2.

CHAPTER-8:PUNISHMENT AN DISCIPLINARY ACTION

8.1 It must be clearly understood that the instances of offences and of

Professional misconduct which are given above do not constitute and are not

intended to constitute a complete list of the infamous acts which calls for

disciplinary action and that by issuing this notice the Medical Council of India

and/or State Medical Councils are in no way precluded from considering and

dealing with any other form of professional misconduct on the part of a

registered practitioner. Circumstances may and do arise from time to time in

relation to which there may occur questions of professional misconduct which

do not come within any of these categories. Every care should be taken that

the code is not violated in letter or spirit. In such instances as in all others, the

Medical Council of India and / or State Medical Council’s have to consider and

decide upon the facts brought before the Medical Council of India and / or

State Medical Councils.

8.2 It is made clear that any complaint with regard to professional

misconduct can be brought before the appropriate Medical Council for

Disciplinary action. The appropriate Medical Council would hold an enquiry and

give opportunity to the registered medical practitioner to be heard in person

or by pleader. If the medical practitioner is found to be guilty of committing

professional misconduct, the appropriate Medical Council may award such

punishment as deemed necessary or may direct the removal altogether or for

a specified period, from the register of the name of the delinquent registered

practitioner. Deletion from the Register shall be widely publicized in local

press as well as in the publications of different Medical

Associations/Societies/Bodies.

In view of the foregoing observations and taking into consideration of

the IMC Regulations-2002, the General Body came to the conclusion that the

respondent doctor has indulged in un-ethical acts and thereby violated the

provisions of IMC Regulations and acted in contravention to the mandatory

provisions of APMPR Act, 1968.

Therefore, the respondent doctor deserves for punishment and decided

that the name of Dr.Srinivas Bathini be removed from the Medical Register for

a period of One Month as per the provisions of Section-17 (2) r/w Section-15

(4) of APMPR Act, 1968 from the date of issuing orders in this regard. It is also

decided to direct the respondent to surrender his Original Registration

Certificate granted to him by A.P.Medical Council as per the provisions of

Section-17 (5) of the Act.

(iii) Case No.20/2008:- The complaint made by Ms.L.Suvarna against

Dr.S.V.Adinarayana Rao, Prema Hospital, Visakhapatnam.

The E&MPC has noted that a registered letter bearing

No.APMC/DC/015/Case No.20/2008, dt:02.09.2009 was addressed to

both the complainant and the respondent. In the letter addressed to

the complainant, she was requested to go to Dr.S.V.Adinarayana Rao,

Prema Hospital, Visakhapatnam to give proper Physiotherapy and

other measures as promised by him and to see that she will be able

to walk without any support. She was also requested to inform this

Council on this aspect. In the letter addressed to the respondent,

Dr.S.V.Adinarayana Rao, he was requested to provide proper

Physiotherapy and other measures as promised by him and see that

she will be able to walk without any support. He was also requested

to inform the Council on this aspect.

The E&MPC came to the conclusion that the complaint made by

Ms.L.Suvarna against Dr.S.V.Adinarayana Rao may be closed as there

is no further complaint from the complainant regarding this case

even after addressing her thorough this office registered letter

No.APMC/DC/015/Case No.20/2008, dt:02.09.2009. The E&MPC

recommended to the Executive Committee accordingly.

The Executive Committee in its meeting held on 22.10.2009

(03.00 PM) has considered this item and decided that the complaint

made by Ms.L.Suvarna be closed as there is no further complaint

regarding this case even after addressing her thorough this office

registered letter No.APMC/DC/015/Case No.20/2008, dt:02.09.2009.

The General Body taking into consideration of the material on

record together with the statements made by the parties concerned

and the observations/recommendations made by the E&MPC as

decided by the Executive Committee has decided to close the

complaint made by Ms.L.Suvarna. However, taking into consideration

of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is decided that the

matter has to be considered if the complainant makes fresh

complaint on the default of the respondent to fulfill the assurance

given by him to the Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee.

(iv) Case No.16/2009:- The complaint made by Sri Meduri Ramesh

Chandra against Dr.M.Bharathi and another. The E&MPC has gone through the

reply furnished by M.Bharathi, Jt.Director, APFSL, Hyderabad and noted that

Scientists (not medical practitioners) working in the DNA Section analyzed the

samples with National/International standard methods and a report was

submitted to the Addl. Senior Civil Judge Court, Tenali on 08.05.2005. The

Committee has also noted that at present the matter is in the jurisdiction of

Senior Civil Judge, Tenali, Guntur District.

Taking into consideration of the explanation given by M.Bharathi, Joint

Director, APFSL, Hyderabad and on perusal of the notes provided under this

item the Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee came to the conclusion that the

respondents do not fall within the jurisdiction of A.P.Medical Council since they

are not registered medical practitioners. It is decided to address the

complainant, so that he may represent the matter before the concerned


The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee recommended to the Executive

Committee accordingly.

The Executive Committee in its meeting held on 22.10.2009 (03.00 PM)

has considered the above observations/recommendations of the Ethical & Mal-

Practices Committee together with material on record has decided that the

respondents do not fall within the jurisdiction of A.P.Medical Council as they

are Forensic Experts. It was also decided that the complainant may be

addressed so that he may represent the matter before the concerned


The General Body taking into consideration of the observations /

recommendations of the E&MPC as approved by the Executive Committee has

decided that the complaint made by Sri Meduri Ramesh Chandra against

Dr.M.Bharathi and another may be dropped in view of the fact that the

respondents are Forensic Experts and not registered practitioners and as such

the A.P.Medical Council has no jurisdiction to enquire in to the allegations

made against non-medical men. It is also decided that the complainant may

be addressed so that he may represent the matter before the concerned


(ii) Case No.03/2009:- The complaint made by Sri Md.Reyaz Pasha against

Dr.K.Satyanarayana & Dr.Sameer Diwale. The General Body noted that the

complainant Sri Md.Reyaz Pasha has stated that his daughter, baby

Md.Shaistha was suffering with Cyanotic congenital heart disease, large sub

aortic ventricular Septal defect, large patent Ductus Arteriosus Severe

Pulmonary Artery Hypertension and she was admitted on 05-03-2007 in

Wockhardt Heart Centre, Wockhardt Heart Hospitals, Kamineni Hospitals

Campus, Hyderabad. The complainant has stated that he has paid the

necessary doctor fees and surgery charges as demanded by the said hospital

by applying to “Govt. of A.P., Cardiac screening children below 12 years” and

the surgery i.e. cyanotic congenital heart disease, large sub aortic ventricular

Septal defect, large patent Ductus Arteriosus Severe Pulmonary Artery

Hypertension was performed to the baby Md.Shaistha on 07-03-2007. But due

to medical negligence on the part of the said hospital, the patient developed

post operative complications like febrile spike and the next day morning she

was drowsy, not responding to commands, icteric and febrile and she was

diagnosed to have cerebral malaria with enteric fever and hepatic

encephalopathy and as such the patient was transferred to pediatric ICU in

Kamineni Hospitals with a view to cover-up their medical negligence during

the pre-operative period and also during post operative care.

He contended that the conduct of Wockhardt Heart Centre, Wockhardt

heart Hospitals and Kamineni Hospitals amounts to deficit of service i.e.

medical negligence as well as deficiency in post operative care.

The General Body noted that as per the notice issued in this regard, the

Respondents, Dr.K.Satyanarayana and Dr. Sameer Diwale filed their reply

affidavits. Both of them have denied the allegations made against them.

Dr.K.Satyanarayana has stated that there was no negligence either medically

or otherwise on his part. He has further stated that it was the combination of

Cerebral Malaria, Typhoid, Encephalopathy, Sepsis and Jaundice, which

contributed to the deterioration of the patient. He has denied that the

Wockhardt Heart Centre and Kamineni Hospitals colluded with one another

and / looted the complainant by playing with the life of the victim baby in

order to extract money as alleged or otherwise.

Dr.Sameer Diwale in his reply affidavit has stated that the patient was

discerned as a high-risk candidate for surgery in view of severe pulmonary

hypertension. The 10% risk of mortality/morbidity was explained to the

parents of the patient. He has stated that it was further explained that after

the proposed operation it was quite possible that her PAH might not resolve

completely and that she would lead a lifestyle with limited effort tolerance in

such a situation. He has stated that the decision was taken to intubate and

reinstitute mechanical ventilation. The patient was subjected to intensive

chest therapy, endotracheal tube suction and given appropriate medicine to

clear her lungs. He has also stated that the chest x-ray was done on 08-03-

2007 which showed the endotracheal tube in place and no effusion or collapse

of the lungs despite the bi lateral crepts and bronchi. He has stated that the

reason for the transfer to the Paediatric ICU was to specialize and give optimal

care to the patient and not due to the fact the diagnosis, which should have

been allegedly done before the surgery being sought to be done now. The

patient was treated continuously but due to the intrinsic and inherent

condition of the patient there was no improvement. He contended that un-

anticipated and un-known complication cannot be termed as medical

negligence.

As per the subsequent notice issued in this regard, the complainant

Md.Reyaz, the respondents, Dr.K.Satyanarayana, Dr.Sameer Diwale and

Dr.S.Sunil Kumar appeared before the E&MPC on 08-09-2009 and their

statements are as follows:

The Statement of the Complainant Sri Md.Reyaz Pasha:

1. When was the baby delivered? After completion of 9 months or not?

Ans. After completion of 9 months.

2. Whether delivery was normal or Cesarean suction?

Ans. Cesarean suction.

3. Why the baby was taken to the Hospital?

Ans. Because of recurrent infection of cough and fever.

4. Where the baby was taken to first (Hospital) ?

Ans. Yashoda Hospital, Malakpet, Hyderabad.

5. Who has seen the baby in the Hospital?

Ans. Dr.Narayana.

6. Where the baby was taken subsequently?

Ans. Gandhi Hospital, Secunderabad.

7. Who has referred to Wockhardt Hospital ?

Ans. From Gandhi Hospital as per the scheme of Government.

8. What was the age of the Child at the time of Operation?

Ans. 7 years.

9. Who has referred the baby in Kamineni Hospital?

Ans. Dr.Sameer Diwale.

10. After admission when the operation was done?

Ans. Next Day.

11. What was approximate duration of the Surgery?

Ans. 6 Hours approximately.

12. When the baby got consciousness?

Ans. After 3 days – the baby came to consciousness.

13. Did the child recognized you after the operation?

Ans. We are not sure.

14. What did the doctor tell first?

Ans. She will recovery slowly.

15. What was the doctor told before surgery?

Ans. The Surgeon has assurance. Some times life may risk @ 10%.

16. How many days, the baby stayed in the Wockhardt Hospital?

Ans. 10 days

17. When she shifted to Intensive Care to General Ward?

Ans. After 8 days.

18. What happened when the baby shifted to General Ward?

Ans. 2 days afterwards she developed high fever and she got fits.

19. When the Paediatrician was called?

Ans. He was called only after the baby developed fits (conclusions).

20. Who has advised to shift the baby from Wockhardt to Kamineni?

Ans. The Paediatrician namely Dr.Satyanarayana.

21. How many days, the baby was stayed in the Hospital (Kamineni) ?

Ans. 1 ½ months.

22. What was the diagnosis made by the Paediatrician?

Ans. Infectious diseases – damaged the brain.

23. Whether there was any such fever before Surgery?

Ans. Before the surgery, there was not fever, all the tests conducted

shows normally of the baby.

24. Do you think that Wockhardt Heart Centre and Kamineni Hospital are

one and the same?

Ans. No; both are separate.

25. Who has asked money for hospital expenses?

Ans. Kamineni Hospital; the money sanctioned by Govt. has

exhausted for the payment made to the Wockhardt Heart Centre

and the charges for Kamineni begins now.

26. Have you asked the Wockhardt doctors about the post operative

treatment/complications?

Ans. Yes, we have asked the doctor about fever and the patient have

gone to yellowish colour but the doctor has said that this is a

normal after such big surgery. The amount sanctioned by the

Government has exhausted with the payment made to the

Wockhardt heart centre. He also stated that to pay some

amount for further treatment.

27. What was the diagnosis made by the pediatrician?

Ans. Typhoid, Malaria, Jaundice and other infection diseases.

28. When was the diagnosis of infection made?

Ans. On 11th Day after shifting from Wockhardt Hospital.

29. What are you expecting from A.P.Medical Council?

Ans. We are incurring lot of expenditure for physiotherapy and

speech therapy at National Institute for Mentally Handicapped

for the recovery of baby health. We are not for money sake.

We want full recovery of the baby’s health. And we request the

medical council to pass necessary orders on the respondents for

taking necessary steps for the improvement of the baby’s

health and see that she will lead normal life.

I also request to take necessary action on the doctors who

have acted negligently during the preoperative and

postoperative surgery. SRI.MD.REYAZ, COMPLAINANT

STATEMENT OF RESPONDENT DR.SAMEER DIWALE:

1. Are you the first person to diagnose the Child’s Disease?

Ans. No. The patient came with a confirmed diagnosis of Acyanotic

Congenital Heart Disease, Ventricular Septal Defect (Large), a

patent Ductus Arteriosus (PDA) with severe pulmonary artery

hypertension (PAH). The patient was referred by the

Government of Andhra Pradesh under (Cardiac Screening for

children below 12 years) (Refer to page 46 of the affidavit of

Dr.Sameer Diwale, dated 9th July, 2009).

2. What was the Diagnosis made at the time of admission?

Ans. The Diagnosis made by me at the time of admission was

Acyanotic Congenital Heart Disease, Ventricular Septal Defect

(Large), a patent Ductus Arteriosus (PDA) with severe

pulmonary artery hypertension (PAH). (Refer to page 47 of the

affidavit of Dr.Sameer Diwale, dated 9th July, 2009).

3. When did you first examine the child?

Ans. The patient was first examined by me as an out-patient on the

5th March, 2007.

(Refer to page 47 of the affidavit of Dr.Sameer Diwale, dated 9 th July,

2009).

4. When was the baby admitted to Wockhardt Heart Centre?

Ans. The patient was admitted to Wockhardt Heart Centre on 5th

March, 2007. (Refer to page 42 of the affidavit of Dr.Sameer Diwale,

dated 9th July, 2009).

5. When was the Surgery undertaken?

Ans. The Surgery was undertaken on the 7th March, 2007 after taking

informed high risk consent from the parents of the patient and

explaining the risks (especially in view of

the severe pulmonary hypertension) in the language of the

patient. (Refer to page 2 para 4 read with paragraph 44 & 45 of the

affidavit of Dr.Sameer Diwale, dated 9th July, 2009).

6. Whether the routine pre-operative tests were normal?

Ans. Yes. The following routine pre-operative investigations were

carried out and found to be within the normal limits. The

investigations were as follows:- (a) Blood grouping and cross

matching, (b) Complete Blood Picture, (c ) Serum Electrolytes,

(d) Serum Creatinine, (e) HIV, (f) HBs Ag., (g) Prothrombin Time,

(h) Activated partial Thromboplastin Time, (i) ECG, (j) X-Ray

chest, (k) 2D Echo-Cardiography and Pre Anesthetic checkup

after investigation. (Refer to page 47 read with page 147 to 159 of

the affidavit of Dr.Sameer Diwale, dated 9th July, 2009).

7. Did the patient have any infectious symptoms like fever and cough on

admission?

Ans. No.

8. When did the baby recover consciousness after Surgery?

Ans. The patient was planned for elective ventilation for 24

hours post operatively, in view of the severe pulmonary artery

hypertension. The patient regained consciousness on

08.03.2007 at 10.00 A.M. once her sedatives and muscle

relaxants were discontinued. (Refer to page 57 of the affidavit of


9. The Complainant in his affidavit says that the following tests should

have been done before Surgery? (i) Lipid Profile, (ii) Liver Function Test,

(iii) Serum

Creatinine, (iv) Blood Urea, (v) Keytone bodies, (vi) Serum Electrolytes,

(vii) Cerebral Spinal Fluid Analysis.

Ans. All the above mentioned tests/investigations were

conducted except Sl.No. (i) Lipid Profile and Sl.No. (vii).

Cerebral Spinal Fluid Analysis. Lipid Profile Tests are conducted

only in adult cardiac surgery patients. Cerebral Spinal Fluid

Analysis (CSF analysis) is an invasive test with its own

complications and is never carried out as a routine preoperative

test for a patient scheduled for heart surgery who is otherwise

healthy. . (Refer to page 3 para 9 of the affidavit of Dr.Sameer Diwale,


Read with the Affidavit of Dr.Sameer Diwale and

Dr.K.Satyanarayana exhibiting three expert opinions dated 3rd

September, 2009.

10. Have you got evidence that all the requisite tests were carried out?

Ans. Yes. The above mentioned requisite tests were carried out.

(Refer to page 147 to 159, page 167, 168 & 170 of the affidavit of


11. What is your pre-operative protocol pertaining to investigations?

Ans. The pre-operative protocol is as follows:- (a) Blood grouping and

cross matching, (b) Complete Blood Picture, (c ) Serum

Electrolytes, (d) Serum Creatinine, (e) HIV, (f) HBs Ag., (g)

Prothrombin Time, (h) Activated partial Thromboplastin Time, (i)

ECG, (j) X-Ray chest, (k) 2D Echo-Cardiography and Pre

Anesthetic checkup after investigation.

12. Who is your regular Paediatrician?

Ans. Consultant Paediatrician of Kamineni Hospitals, L.B.Nagar is my

regular Paediatrician. In the instant case it was

Dr.K.Satyanarayana. It is pertinent to note that I am a trained

Paediatric Cardiac Surgeon. (Refer to page 36 to 39 of the affidavit

of Dr.Sameer Diwale, dated 9th July, 2009).

13. Whether the management of Wockhardt Heart Centre and Kamineni

Hospital are one and the same?

Ans. No, they are legally separate entities. However, for clinical

purposes and administrative purposes with a view to facilitate

optimal patient care, the two entities co-ordinate and work as a

cohesive whole.

14. Whether there is implied or written consent between Wockhardt Heart

Centre and Kamineni Hospital?

Ans. Yes, there is a legal agreement between Wockhardt Heart

Centre and Kamineni Hospital demarcating the individual legal

responsibilities of the two legal entities keeping in mind optimal

patient care.

I crave leave to file the said agreement when produced.

15. Who is responsible for any patient admitted under your care, when

complications arise?

Ans. It is the responsibility of the Cardiac and Thoracic Surgeon.

Hence in the instant case I was responsible for the same.

16. What were the complications? When did you notice the complications?

Ans. There were no cardiac complications either operatively or post

operatively. However, the patient on investigation developed

the following infective complications unrelated to the cardiac

condition:-

a) Cerebral Malaria

b) Enteric Fever

c) Encephalopathy?? Hypoxic/? Hepatic.

The complications developed and were noticed and then later

confirmed through investigations on 17/3/07 and 18/3/07

respectively.

17. Whether the child was screened by the Paediatrician?

Ans. As stated above I am trained in Paediatric cardiac surgery and it

is a normal protocol for Cardiac and Thoracic surgeons trained

in Paediatric cardiac surgery to manage the patient peri-

operatively in routine cases. It is only when the specific

complications arise that the same is referred to a Paediatrician.

18. What was the status of recovery of the patient post-operatively?

Ans. By post operative day 5 the patient was neurologically sound,

communicating, feeding on her own, and fully mobilized. (Refer

to pages 73 to 76 of the affidavit of Dr.Sameer Diwale, dated 9th July,

2009).

19. When was the patient shifted from Wockhardt Heart Centre to Kamineni

Hospital?

Ans. 17/3/07 at 2.30 p.m. (Refer to pages 82 of the affidavit of Dr.Sameer

Diwale, dated 9th July, 2009).

20. Whether the Paediatrician was called on the 13th March, 2007?

Ans. Post operatively on 13/3/07 the patient developed fever which is

a common occurrence usually due to pericarditis or sepsis.

Appropriate investigations (blood culture and catheter culture)

were done which were negative for sepsis. Patient became

afebrile the next day. Treatment was started for pericarditis and

also the spectrum of antibiotics were changed as and by way of

abundant caution. Hence the reference to the pediatrician was

not necessitated. (Refer to pages 111, 125 and ICU chart on

14/03/07 of the affidavit of Dr.Sameer Diwale, dated 9th July, 2009).

21. When was Paediatrician first called?

Ans. The Paediatrician was immediately called on the 17/03/07, when

the patient’s altered sensorium was detected for the first time.

(Refer to pages 78 of the affidavit of Dr.Sameer Diwale, dated 9th July,

2009).

22. What is your clinical diagnosis of fever from 13th March, 2007 to 17th

March, 2007?

Ans. During the above mentioned period a diagnosis of post-

operative pericardial inflammation (Dresler’s Syndrome) was

made and treated according to standard medical protocol. The

patient remain afebrile from the 14th March, 2007 to 16th March,

2007 and responded to the above treatment.

23. What was the blood culture and catheter culture report?

Ans. Both the culture reports were sterile. (Refer to pages 111 and 125

of the affidavit of Dr.Sameer Diwale, dated 9th July, 2009).

24. Do you think that the patient’s responsibility is finished when the patient

is shifted to the Kamineni hospital under Dr.Satyanarayana’s Care?

Ans. Once the patient is admitted under my care he/she becomes my

responsibility from the time of admission till discharge. I have

fulfilled this responsibility insofar as even after the transfer of

the patient from Wockhardt Heart Centre to Kamineni hospitals,

I have regularly visited the patient and monitored the progress

of the patient. I have also had frequent interactions with Dr.

Satyanarayana, the treating Paediatrician in Kamineni

Hospitals.

25. What was the reason for shifting the patient from the ward to the

Paediatric ICU?

Ans: The reason for the transfer to the Paediatric ICU was to give

optimal specialist care to the patient.

26. Is it due to the clinical picture and betterment of the patient or collusion

for monetary benefit?

Ans. The reason for the transfer of the patient to the Paediatric ICU

was to give optimal specialist care to the patient and not for

any other reason. I deny that there was any collusion for

monetary benefit.

27. Do you think that partial negligence on your part as it was a

Government paid case?

Ans. I vehemently deny that there was any negligence on my part in

the diagnosis, prognosis and course of treatment. I say that all

patients are treated in the same manner medically irrespective

of whether the case is subsidized by the government or not.

28. Have you asked for money, more than what the Government has

sanctioned?

Ans. No. The question of asking for money does not arise when my

professional fees are given by the Hospital. The patient’s fees

structure is an administrative function and is handled by the

Hospital. The doctor does not come into play. DR.SAMEER DIWALE, RESPONDENT

STATEMENT OF RESPONDENT DR.SATYANARAYANA:

1. Are you the concerned Paediatric consultant for Wockhardt Heart

Centre?

Ans. No. I am the consultant Paediatrician for Kamineni Hospital.

However, whenever my professional expertise is required by

Wockhardt Heart Centre in case of complications, I render my

services.

2. When were you consulted?

Ans. I saw the patient on 17th March, 2007 at 02.30 P.M and made a

provisional diagnosis of? Septicaemia, and? Encephalopathy

with Jaundice. Immediately, on making the provisional diagnosis

appropriate investigations were ordered and treatment

commenced. (Refer to pages 79 to 82 of the affidavit of Dr.Sameer

Diwale, dated 9th July, 2009).

3. Do you ask for screening for frequent recurring infections? Do you

screen for infectious diseases for surgery?

Ans. As a routine protocol we do not screen for infectious diseases

unless clinically any features suggestive of infective pathology

manifest themselves. In the instant case there was no infective

pathology like cough, fever, burning urination etc.

4. Who advised Dr.Sameer Diwale to shift the patient from Wockhardt

Heart Centre to Kamineni Hospital?

Ans. I advised Dr.Sameer Diwale to shift the patient from Wockhardt

Heart Centre to Kamineni Hospital, after consultation to provide

optimal medical care and support to the patient. (Refer to pages

82 of the affidavit of Dr.K.Satyanarayana, dated 9th July, 2009).

5. What was the diagnosis made?

Ans. Diagnosis of Falciparum Malaria complicated cerebral malaria was

made on the 17th March, 2007 and then started on appropriate

treatment immediately (09.30 P.M.). (Refer to pages 19 & 21 of the

affidavit of Dr.K.Satyanarayana, dated 9th July, 2009).

6. When was Enteric fever diagnosed?

Ans. Enteric fever was diagnosed after investigations confirmed on

the 19.03.2007 (IgM Salmonella +ve) and appropriate treatment

continued after discussing with the Gastroenterologist as there

were combination of cerebral Malaria with enteric fever and

Encephalopathy. (Refer to pages 27 & 352 of the affidavit of

Dr.K.Satyanarayana, dated 9th July, 2009).

7. Whether HBS Ag. Screening Test was done? When?

Ans. HBS Ag. Screening was done pre-operatively and blood

products which are given peri-operatively are screened for HBS

Ag. Hence the HBS Ag. test was not repeated post-operatively

and was not necessitated. However, Hepatitis Viral Markers

were conducted for Hepatitis-A & C to rule out viral hepatitis as

a cause for Jaundice, other than Malaria and Enteric Fever.

(Refer to pages 17 & 324 of the affidavit of Dr.K.Satyanarayana, dated

9th July, 2009).

8. How did the patient respond to your treatment?

Ans. The response was slower than expected due to the likelihood of

an Accute presentation of cerebral malaria with Grade-I/II Coma

and associated Enteric Fever with Hepatitis and

Encephalopathy. (Refer to pages 15 of the affidavit of

Dr.K.Satyanarayana, dated 9th July, 2009).

9. What will be the general prognosis of the child, if the child has not

recovered from Cerebral Malaria?

Ans. According to the available medical literature 20% mortality

exists despite the early and optimal diagnosis and treatment.

10% may have persistent neurological deficiencies in the form

of coma, hemi-paresis, cranial nerve palsies etc. (50% of them

may recover completely in 6 months, remaining 50% may have

variable neurological deficits).

Here to annexed and marked Exhibit-A is a copy of the

extract from the IAP Indian Academy of Paediatric text book on

Paediatric emergencies, under the heading of “Prognosis” page

no 227.

10. How many days the child was kept in Kamineni Hospital?

Ans. From the 17th March, 2007 till 20th April, 2007. (Refer to pages 368

of the affidavit of Dr.K.Satyanarayana, dated 9th July, 2009).

11. When was the advise of the Neurophysician taken?

Ans. Due to the development of spasticity the advice of the

Neurophysician was taken on 23rd March, 2007. It is pertinent to

note that due to the intrinsic condition of the patient the

recovery was slow from the complications of cerebral malaria,

encephalopathy and enteric fever. (Refer to pages 68 & 69 of the


12. What was the neurological status of the child at the time of discharge?

Ans. The Neurological status at the time of discharge was that the

patient was conscious not oriented, afebrile, hemodynamically

stable, and on Ryle’s tube feeding. (Refer to pages 369 of the


13. Whether the child was brought by the parents to the hospital for follow

up?

Ans. No. There was no follow up after the discharge on 20th April,

2007 despite specific advise to follow up once a week in the

Paediatric OPD.

14. Whether any thing can be done now to the patient for her improvement?

Ans. Clinically I have not examined the patient after the 20th April,

2007 (date of discharge). Hence, I cannot comment on the

same. Sd/-DR.K.SATYANARAYANA, RESPONDENT-II

STATEMENT OF MANAGER HOSPITAL ADMINISTRATION,WOCKHARDT HEART CENTRE

1. What is your name?

Ans. Dr. Sunil Kumar Sepuri.

2. What is your designation?

Ans. I am the Manager-Hospital Administration, Wockhardt Heart

Centre.

3. Are you representing the Kamineni Hospital also?

Ans. No. However our advocate is representing both the

organizations above mentioned.

4. What is the amount sanctioned by the Government to this case?

Ans. The amount sanctioned by the Government in this case is

Rs.44,000/-. (Refer to pages 189 of the affidavit of Dr.Sameer Diwale,


5. Are you sure that the amount was sufficient for the operation?

Ans. The cost incurred at Wockhardt Heart Centre was Rs.74,592/- and the amount sanctioned by the Government of Andhra Pradesh was Rs.44,000/-. The balance of the amount was waived off by the Hospital. (Refer to pages 192 of the affidavit of Dr.Sameer Diwale, dated 9 th July, 2009).

6. What is the understanding between your hospital and Government for

such operations?

Ans. The understanding between the hospital and the Government of Andhra Pradesh is reflected in the G.O.Ms.No.362 HM&FW (K1) Department, dt:01.10.2004. G.O.Ms.No.362 HM&FW (K1) Department, dt: 01.10.2004 clearly states as follows:-

“Government of Andhra Pradesh has announced that

financial aid will be given for the treatment and surgery for

children of the age group of 0 – 12 years suffering from heart

diseases by utilizing facilities in Government and Private

hospitals”.

“Cardiac problems requiring surgery are covered in the

above nine categories. Other cardiac problems not included in

the above categories, whenever they come up would be

examined and put in appropriate category on a case to case

basis by the central cell at Gandhi Hospital in consultation with

the Director of Medical Education”.

Here to annexed and marked Exhibit-A is a copy of the

Government of Andhra Pradesh Abstract G.O.Ms.No.362 HM&FW

(K1) Department, dt:01.10.2004.

7. What is the Financial liability of the management aspect when the

patient is admitted under the Scheme?

Ans. The liability of the management is limited to performing Cardiac

Surgery as more particularly described in the foregoing

paragraph which states as follows:-

“Government of Andhra Pradesh has announced that financial

aid will be given for the treatment and surgery for children of

the age group of 0 – 12 years suffering from heart diseases by

utilizing facilities in Government and Private hospitals”.

It is important to note that G.O.Ms.No.362 HM&FW (K1)

Department, dt: 01.10.2004 pertaining to the billing procedure

of the hospital states as follows:-

“The Private Hospitals / Nizam’s Institute of Medical Sciences participating in this Children’s Cardiac Health program shall not charge any amount from the patients referred by Cardiac Cells constituted in Government Teaching Hospitals. They may prepare and submit the bills as per the above guidelines with discharge summary to the Director of Medical Education, A.P., Hyderabad for payment”.

8. What were the expenses incurred at Kamineni Hospital and Wockhardt

Heart Centre. Is it true that they have paid Rs.1,38,000/-?

Ans. No. The consolidated hospital bill was Rs.98,386/- at Kamineni

Hospitals. And the patient has deposited of sum of Rs.62,000/-

of which Rs.15,686/- was refunded. The balance bill was waived

off, on humanitarian grounds. The actual amount paid by the

complainant to the Kamineni Hospital is Rs.46,314/-.(Refer to

pages 382 of the affidavit of Dr.K.Satyanarayana, dated 9th July,

2009).

No charge was levied by Wockhardt Heart Centre in respect of the Cardiac Surgery, from the patient. (Refer to pages 192 of the affidavit of Dr.Sameer Diwale, dated 9th

July, 2009). Sd/-DR.SUNIL

KUMAR.S.

The Committee has gone through the Additional Affidavit filed by

Dr.Sameer Diwale on 08.09.2009 wherein the Expert Opinion of

Dr.B.T.Prasad Rao was marked as Exhibit-A. The Committee has gone

through the Exhibit-A and noted that the President, District Consumer

Forum in his letter dt:06.07.2005 has sought for the Expert Opinion on the

consumer case filed by Md.Reyaz Pasha. As requested in this regard

Dr.V.T.Prasad Rao, Prof. & HOD, Dept. of CT Surgery, GH/GMC in his expert

opinion has stated that: “On verification of records available to me and

best of my knowledge, I opine that:

1. The Diagnosis, Pre OP Evaluation, Surgery and Post OP

Management are optimal and as per standard Medical Protocol.

2. Lipid Profile, Ketone Bodies Test and CSF Analysis have no role

in the Pre-OP Evaluation of this patient.

3. When serious medical problem i.e. Encephalopathy which is not

with in the relam of Cardiac Surgery is identified, shifting the

patient to Paediatric ICU constitutes ideal and Optimal Patient

Care.

4. Inspite of Intensive Medical Care in Paediatric ICU the patient

succumbed to the present condition as sequele to the

Encephalopathy.

The Committee has also gone through the copy of affidavit of expert

opinion given by Dr.Anil Tendolkar which has been enclosed to the Additional

Affidavit. In his affidavit Dr.Anil Tendolkar, Cardiac Surgeon, Mumbai has

stated that the cause of this unfortunate event in Baby Shaistha’s Case, the

age, the basic Heart Problem super added with prolonged ventilation and

infection such as malaria (especially falciparum malaria which is a serious

variety of infection) all have contributory factors in this adverse outcome. As

to whether there was a deficiency of service in this case, he has stated that

“on studying the case papers, it can be construed that the process of

treatment appears logically reasonable and as per standard practices”.

The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee after taking into consideration of

the entire material on record together with the statements of the parties

concerned, the expert opinion given by Dr.B.T.Prasad Rao, Prof. & HOD, CT

Surgery, GH/GMC and the expert opinion given by Dr.Anil Tendolkar by way of

an affidavit filed before the Hon’ble Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum at

Hyderabad has come to the following conclusions:

(i) The expert opinion given by Dr.B.T.Prasad Rao, Prof. & HOD, CT

Surgery, GMC to Hon’ble President, District Consumer Forum,

R.R.District that “ when the serious medical problem i.e.

encephalopathy which is not within the realm of cardiac surgery is

identified, shifting the patient to Paediatric ICU constitute ideal

optimal patient care” be noted.

(ii) There is no professional negligence on the part of respondent

doctors, Dr.Sameer Diwale and Dr.K.Satyanarayana. There is no

negligence on the part of treating doctors, non-monitoring aspects

and the post sequele is because of the consequent infection which is

not connected with the Surgery.

(iii) The management of Wockhardt Heart Hospital and Kamineni Hospital

be advised for consideration of refund of 50% of the bill amount

which was borne by the complainant on humanitarian grounds and

taking into consideration of the poor economical condition of the

complainant and in view of the fact that the patient was admitted

under government scheme of ‘ AP Cardiac Screening children below

12 years’.

The Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee recommends to the

Executive Committee accordingly.

The Executive Committee after taking into consideration of the entire

material on record and taking into consideration of the

observations/recommendations of the E&MPC has decided to approve the

same in relation to the aspects of negligence. The Executive Committee did

not accept the other recommendation of the E&MPC that “the management be

advised for consideration of refund of 50% of the bill amount which was borne

by the complainant on humanitarian grounds and taking into consideration of

the poor economical condition of the complainant and in view of the fact that

the patient was admitted under government scheme of ‘AP Cardiac

Screening children below 12 years”.

The General Body has perused the entire material together with

the statements of parties concerned. Dr.K.Ramesh Reddy, Member

speaking on the occasion expressed the view that ‘when a serious

problem occurred if the patient is undergoing treatment under

Government package, the hospital management should treat the

patient with the permission of the Government authorities”. He has

further expressed the view in this case, ‘the respondent doctors

shifting the patient to Paediatric ICU is not correct. It seems that the

respondents have washed their hands by shifting the patient to

Paediatric ICU and levied charges of Rs.40,000/- from the patient’.

Dr.P.Sucharitha Murthy, Ex-Officio member expressed the view

that ‘this type of problems will occur after blood transfusion and they

should screen for malaria also’. She has also expressed the view that

‘all these are hospital infections’.

Dr.K.Ramesh Reddy has further expressed his view that ‘the

Kamineni Hospitals and Wockhardt Heart Centre are one and the

same, they cannot say that these are different institutions’. He has

also expressed the view that ‘the respondent doctors violated the

code of Ethics and it is a misconduct since the patient was shifted to

another hospital where the patient was admitted for treatment under

a Government package treatment.’ He has expressed the view ‘that

during the course of treatment, the hospital management should not

charge extra amount even in the case of complications arose’.

The General Body expressed the unanimous view that if there

are any problems arise under the package, the hospital management

should represent the Government for further approval.

The General Body taking into consideration of the facts of the

case together with the statements made by the parties concerned

and the observations/recommendations of the E&MPC and the

decision taken by the Executive Committee has decided that a letter

be addressed to the management of the hospital to refund the extra

amount which was charged from the patient.

Case No.08/2009

The General Body has noted that in Case No.08/2009 - Complaint made

by Sri Kotla Raju against Dr.G.Indira and others of SVS Hospital,

Mahaboobnagar, the E&MPC has come to the conclusion that ‘there is definite

negligence on the part of DMO and Anaesthetist on duty and also vicarious

responsibility on the Professor of Medicine and the Professor of Anesthesiology

while discharging their duties’. The General Body while accepting the decision

of the Executive Committee, directs the E&MPC to make definite

recommendation as to the punishment to be given to the respondent doctors.


item on the agenda, i.e. to consider the report of CME Committee dt:

27.08.2009 as approved by the Executive Committee.

The General Body noted that the CME Committee has met on

27.08.2009 and considered several items and made necessary

recommendations. The recommendations of CEM Committee were placed

before the Executive Committee in the meeting held on 27.08.2009 (03.00

PM). The Executive Committee after detailed discussions taken necessary

decisions accepting the recommendations of the CME Committee with

modifications.

The General Body noted that the CME Committee recommended the

following:-

(i) Recommended for conducting CME Programmes 3 times in a year.

Conducting the Internees Ethics Awareness Programmes – 3 times.

(ii) Conducting CME Programmes on behalf of APMC and extending

financial assistance of Rs.25,000/-

(iii) Conducting Workshops/Seminars at various places to bring

awareness of the Medical Council regulations and extending

financial assistance of Rs.1,000/-.

(iv) To constitute small teams to make surprise checks on the

hospitals/clinics/Nursing Homes run by Quacks.

(v) Recommended to the Finance Committee to consider to claim

actual expenditure incurred by those members of the Council who

come on car for the meetings of the Council/Committees.

The Executive Committee has approved these recommendations with

modifications.

The Executive Committee has taken the following decisions:

(v) It is decided that the present amount of Rs.30/- per student for each

session of Ethics Awareness Programme be continued.

(vi) It is decided that the CME Programmes in districts be conducted in

association with IMA and its local bodies. It is also resolved that

Guidelines be prepared for sanctioning the amount of Rs.25,000/- for

CME Programme conducted at each district level. It is also resolved

that a booklet be prepared which shall include the Act and functions

of APMC be distributed.

(vii) It is resolved that the recommendation of CME Committee to address

a letter to IMA/GDA/APNA/Local Bodies etc. in order to co-ordinate the

workshops / seminars.

(viii) It is decided that the recommendation of CME Committee to

constitute small teams from members of various committees to make

surprise checks/visits of any hospitals/clinics/nursing homes run by

un-qualified persons be approved. It is also resolved that the decision

of Council be placed before the Hon’ble High Court and Govt. of

Andhra Pradesh for appropriate direction in this regard.

After careful consideration the General Body decided to approve the

report of the CME Committee as per the modifications made by the Executive

Committee.


item on the agenda, i.e. “to consider the report of the Finance Committee

dt:15-09-2009 as approved by the Executive Committee”.

The General Body noted that the Finance Committee met on 15.09.2009

and considered several issues and made its recommendations. The General

Body noted that the Finance Committee made the following

recommendations.

(i) Enhancement of sitting fee for members coming from outstation to

Rs.1,500/- and members of Hyderabad/Local Areas to Rs.1,200/-.

Accommodation charges of Rs.800/- for the members coming from

out station.

(ii) Enhancement of fee to the members of the Council for attending

Internees Ethics Awareness Programmes conducted in various

Medical Colleges in the State. Fee including members of

Hyderabad City and Local Areas to Rs.1,200/-. Accommodation

charges of Rs.800/- for out station members.

(iii) Enhancement of conveyance allowance of the staff members from

Rs.750/- to Rs.1000/- per month. Enhancement of conveyance

allowance to the Registrar from Rs.3000/- to Rs.5000/- per month.

(iv) Introducing Challans System for payment of Registration Fee and

other fee to the Council.

(v) Approval to the Memorandum of understanding executed by Bank

of Baroda.

(vi) Recommendation of Financial Assistance of Rs.25,000/- to the CME

Programmes sponsored by APMC in the District Head

Quarters/Medical Colleges etc.

(vii) Recommendation of regular pay to Smt.L.Madhavi Latha, Asst.

w.e.f.01.10.2009.


considered the recommendations of the Finance Committee. The Executive

Committee after detailed discussion has approved the above

recommendations. In the case of sanctioning regular pay scale to

Smt.L.Madhavi Latha, while approving the recommendation of the Finance

Committee has decided to obtain legal opinion of the Standing Counsel as to

the power of the Council to create a post in the Cadre of Junior Assistant.

The General Body after detailed discussion has decided to approve the

recommendations of the Finance Committee as approved by the Executive

Committee.


item on the agenda, i.e. to consider Regularization of the services of Sri G.Anil

Kumar, Junior Assistant.

The General Body has noted that this item was considered by the

Executive Committee in its meeting held on 26.11.2009 and decided to

regularize the services of Sri G.Anil Kumar w.e.f.01.08.2008 and declare his

probation w.e.f. 01.08.2009.

The General Body noted that Sri G.Anil Kumar was appointed on

30.04.2008 on consolidated pay and consequent on retirement of one Junior

Assistant on 31.07.2008, the Executive Committee in its meeting held on

30.07.2008 has decided to appoint him in the regular pay scale attached to

the post of Jr.Assistant and accordingly orders were issued to appoint him in

the regular pay scale w.e.f.01.08.2008. The appointment was ratified by the

General Body in the meeting held on 16.12.2008.

The General Body noted that Sri G.Anil Kumar completed one year

satisfactory service on 31.07.2009. The General Body after detailed discussion

has decided that the services of Sri G.Anil Kumar be regularized

w.e.f.01.08.2008 and his probation be declared w.e.f.01.08.2009.


item on the agenda, i.e to consider Regularization of the services of Sri

V.Suresh, Office Subordinate.

The General Body has noted that this item was considered by the

Executive Committee in its meeting held on 26.11.2009 and decided to

regularize the services of Sri V.Suresh w.e.f.01.08.2008 and declare his

probation w.e.f. 01.08.2009.

The General Body noted that Sri V.Suresh, Office Subordinate was

appointed on 30.04.2008 on consolidated pay and subsequently the Executive

Committee in its meeting held on 30.07.2008 has considered to appoint him in

the regular pay scale attached to the post of Office Subordinate in the clear

vacancy existing in the cadre of Attender/Office Subordinate. Accordingly

orders were issued to appoint him in the regular pay scale w.e.f.01.08.2008.

The appointment of Sri V.Suresh was ratified by the General Body in the

meeting held on 16.12.2008.

The General Body noted that Sri V.Suresh, Office Subordinate completed

one year satisfactory service on 31.07.2009. The General Body after detailed

discussion has decided that the services of Sri V.Suresh, Office Subordinate be

regularized w.e.f.01.08.2008 and his probation be declared w.e.f.01.08.2009.


item on the agenda, i.e to consider creation of one post of Jr. Assistant

w.e.f.01-10-2009 for appointment of Smt.L.Madhavi Latha in the regular Scale

of Pay.

The General Body noted that Smt. L.Madhavi Latha was appointed on

consolidated pay of Rs.6,000/- temporarily w.e.f. 08-08-2008. She has

submitted a representation to consider her case for appointment on regular

pay scale attached to the post of Jr. Asst. However, as per the approval given

by the Chairman, Finance Committee, the Executive Committee in its meeting

held on 20-05-2009 has decided that the fixed emoluments be enhanced to

Rs.9,000/- w.ef.01-06-2009.

The General Body noted that the Finance Committee met on 15-09-2009

and Dr.P.Sucharitha Murthy, Director, IPM & Member, Finance Committee with

the permission of the Chair has raised the issue of appointing Smt. L.Madhavi

Latha, Asst. on regular Pay Scale. The Finance Committee after detailed

discussion and taking into consideration of the fact that she has completed

one year of service on fixed emoluments and decided to appoint the individual

in the regular Scale of Pay attached to the post of Jr. Asst. w.e.f. 01-10-2009.

The recommendation of the Finance Committee was considered by

the Executive Committee in its meeting held on 22-10-2009. The

Executive Committee after taking into consideration of the

recommendation of the Finance Committee and after detailed

discussion, decided that Smt.L.Madhavi Latha be appointed on

regular pay scale attached to the post of Junior Assistant

w.e.f.01.10.2009. It is also decided to direct the Secretary to obtain

the opinion of Standing Counsel with regard to the creating of post

as per the exigencies of work and rule position.

The General Body noted that as per the decision taken in this

regard, a letter dt:12-11-2009 was addressed to the

Standing Counsel of APMC seeking his opinion as to the power of the

Council to create posts. The Standing Counsel after going through

the provisions of Section 13(3) of A.P.Medical Practitioners

Registration Act, 1968 has expressed the opinion that ‘the Medical

Council itself is competent to appoint officers and servants as it may

deem necessary’ In view of the above position, he has expressed the

view that the Council is at liberty to create posts and appoint suitable

persons to the posts depending upon the exigencies of work load.

The General Body taking into consideration of the Report of

the Finance Committee dated 15-09-2009, the approval given by the

Executive Committee in its meeting held on 22-10-2009 and the

legal opinion given by the Standing Counsel has decided to create

one post in the cadre of Junior Asst. The General Body has also

approved the decision of the Executive Committee to appoint

Smt.L.Madhavi Latha on regular pay scale attached to the post of

Junior Assistant w.e.f.01.10.2009.


material placed before it,

the General Body has passed the following resolutions unanimously.


It is resolved that the Minutes of the meeting of the General Body

held on dt: 31-03-09 be confirmed. It is also resolved that the action

taken report on the minutes of the previous meeting of the General

Body be approved.

2. TO CONSIDER MINUTES OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE IN ITS MEETINGS HELD ON 20.05.2009, 01.07.2009, 27.08.2009, 22.10.2009 & 26.11.2009 AND TO APPROVE THE SAME.

It is resolved that the Minutes of the meeting of the Executive

Committee held on 20.05.2009, 01.07.2009, 27.08.2009, 22.10.2009 &

26.11.2009 be confirmed.

3. TO CONSIDER THE BRIEF REPORT OF THE CHAIRMAN, E&MPC AND TO PERUSE THE STATUS OF COMPLAINTS PENDING BEFORE THE COUNCIL.

It is resolved that the details given in the Brief Report of the

Chairman, E & MPC be noted.

4. TO CONSIDER THE REPORTS OF THE ETHICAL & MAL-PRACTICES COMMITTEE DT:15.02.2009, 30.04.2009, 26.05.2009, 26.06.2009, 27.07.2009, 08.09.2009 & 22.10.2009.

(A) It is resolved that the Reports of the Ethical & Mal Practices Committee dated:15.02.09 be approved. It is also resolved that the statements of the parties concerned be on record.

(B) It is resolved that the Reports of the Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee dated: 30.04.09 be approved. It is also resolved that the statements of the parties concerned be on record.

(i) In Case No. 09/2006, i.e. in the Complaint made by Sri Harinatha Baba, it is

Resolved that there is no negligence on the part of the Respondent, Dr.Narasimhan, Cardiologist in treating the patient, Ms.Swathi at Care Hospital, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad.

(ii) In Case No.23/2007, i.e. the Complaint made by Sri B.Venkateswara Reddy against Dr.G.Satyanarayana and others of Kamineni Hospital, Hyderabad, It is resolved that there is no negligence on the part of Dr.G.Satyanarayana and others in treating the patient, B.Uttam Reddy.

(C ) It is resolved that the Reports of the Ethical & Mal Practices Committee dated: 26.05.09 be approved. It is also resolved that the statements of the parties concerned be on record.

(D) It is resolved that the Reports of the Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee dated: 26.06.09 be approved. It is also resolved that the statements of the parties concerned be on record.

(i) In Case No.17/2008, i.e the complaint made by Sri Kalluri Adinarayana against Dr.G.Subba Rao, it is resolved that the statement of the respondent Dr.G.Subba Rao be on record. (ii) In Case No.18/2008, i.e the complaint made by Sri M.G.Ramulu Yadav against Dr.V.V.Reddy, it is resolved that the application of the complainant seeking permission of the Council to withdraw his complaint be on record. It is also resolved that the statement of the respondent Dr.V.V.Reddy be on record. (iii) In Case No.20/2008, i.e the complaint made by Ms.L.Suvarna against Dr.S.V.Adinarayana Rao, it is resolved that the statements of the complainant and respondent be on record. (iv) In Case No.21/2008, i.e the complaint made by Dr. B.Ramachandraiah against Dr.P.Chandrasekhar and others, it is resolved that the statements of the of the parties concerned be on record. (v) In Case No.08/2008, i.e. the Complaint made by Sri Gosu Nagabhushanam and Gosu Varamma against Dr.Thumu Ramakrishna of New Life Multi Speciality Hospital, Khammam, it is resolved that ‘Censure’ be imposed on the Respondent Dr.Thumu Ramakrishna for giving frequent advertisements in press, for not maintaining the records properly and for not maintaining the MLC register in the case of late Sri Gosu Ananda Rao who met with an accident and admitted to the hospital with injuries. (vi) In Case No.24/2008, i.e. the Complaint made by Dr.Kylas Pabba against Dr.A.Sai Ravi Shankar, Karimnagar, it is resolved that the name of the Respondent, Dr.A.Sai Ravi Shankar be removed from the Medical Register for a period of 1 (One) month as per the provisions of Section 17(2) of APMP from the date of communication made in this regard for violation of provisions of 1.4.2 of IMC Regulations, 2002. (vii) In Case No.22/2007, i.e. the complaint made by Sri B.Kishore against Dr.Batchu Radha Krishna, it is resolved that there is no negligence on the part of Dr.Batchu Radha Krishna in treating the patient, Sri B.Prakash at Satya Hospital, Warangal. It is further resolved that the objections raised by Dr.Batchu Radha Krishna in directing him to appear before the committee are not maintainable in view of the provisions contained in Rule-6 of APMC Enquiry Rules, 1978. (viii) In Case No.12/2008, i.e. the complaint made by Mrs.C.Ramalingeswari against Dr.P.Aruna, Hyderabad, it is resolved that there is no negligence on the part of the respondent Dr.P.Aruna in treating the patient, Mrs.C.Ramalingeswari Devi at Aruna Hospital, Hyderabad.

(ix) In Case No.13/2008, i.e. the complaint made by Sri Ravinder Dwivedi against Dr.Sunil Kapoor, it is resolved that there is no negligence on the part of the respondent Dr.Sunil Kapoor in treating the patient, Mrs.Laxmi Bai (aged 88 years) at Care Hospital, Hyderabad.

(E) It is resolved that the Reports of the Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee dated: 28.07.09 be approved.

(i) It is also resolved that the statements of the parties concerned be on record.

(ii) In Case No.08/2008, i.e. the Complaint made by Sri Gosu Nagabhushanam and Gosu Varamma, the decision of E&MPC as directed by the Executive Committee that the respondent Dr.Thumu Ramakrishna of New Life Multi Speciality Hospital, Khammam be warned for proper maintenance of records since he did not produce any record pertaining to the discharge of the patient Gosu Ananda Rao. (iii) In Case No.18/2008, i.e the complaint made by Sri M.G.Ramulu Yadav against Dr.V.V.Reddy, it is resolved that henceforth respondent is found practicing as Orthopaedic Surgeon, he would be liable for appropriate action. (iv) In Case No.01/2009, i.e. the complaint made by Sri K.Prasad, it is resolved that the statement of the respondent, Sri Srinivas Bathini be on record. (v) In Case No.23/2008, i.e. the complaint received against Dr.V.Sriramulu, it is resolved that the same be kept in abeyance in view of the stay granted by the Hon’ble High Court on the orders passed by the III Senior Civil Judge, CCC, Sec’bad, dt:04.07.2008 until receipt of further orders of the Hon’ble High Court in this regard.

(F) It is resolved that the Reports of the Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee dated: 08.09.09 be approved.

(i) In Case No.08/2009, i.e. the complaint made by Sri Kotla Raju against Dr.G.Indira and others, it is resolved that the statements of the parties concerned be on record. (ii)In Case No.09/2009, i.e. the complaint made by Sri T.Obi Reddy against Dr.S.Narasimhulu, it is resolved that the statement of the complainant and the Counsel for respondent be on record. (iii) In Case No.16/2008, i.e the complaint made by Smt M.Uma Devi, it is resolved that the statement of the complainant and the respondent’s representative be on record. (iv) In Case No.17/2008, i.e. the Complaint made by Sri Kalluri Adinarayana against Dr.Garikapati Subba Rao, it is resolved that there is no negligence on the part of the Respondent, Dr.Garikapati Subba Rao in treating the patient, Smt. Kalluri Subbayamma since the respondent is a qualified doctor and referred to higher centre and the death was not occurred in his hospital. It is also further resolved that the Respondent has not indulged in any un-ethical acts as he has not used any spurious medicines as per the certificate issue by Drug Inspector and his Nursing Home has got registered under the clinical establishment Act.

(v) In Case No.20/2008, i.e. the complaint made by Ms.L.Suvarna, it is resolved that the decision of E&MPC that the response from the complainant and the respondent be awaited is approved. (vi) In Case No.21/2008, i.e. the complaint made by Dr.B.Ramachandraiah, it is resolved that the telegraphic orders of Hon’ble High Court to stop further proceedings against Dr.V.Murali Mohan be noted. (vii) In Case No.22/2008, i.e. the complaint made by Sri T.Sambi Reddy, it is resolved that the decision taken by E&MPC to refer the matter to a Senior Cardiologist and a Senior Neuro Physician be approved. (viii) In Case No.15/2009, i.e. the complaint made by Sri M.Prabhakar Rao, it is resolved that the decision of E&MPC to obtain the legal opinion of Standing Counsel so as to ascertain whether the Council is competent to take action against a doctor who was convicted by the Hon’ble High Court in the year 1999.

(G) It is resolved that the Reports of the Ethical & Mal-Practices Committee dated: 22.10.09 be approved. (i) In Case No.01/2009, i.e. the Complaint made by Sri K.Prasad against Dr.Bathini Srinivas, it is resolved that the name of the Respondent, Dr.Bathini Srinivas be removed from the Medical Register for a period of 1 (One) month as per the provisions of Section 17(2) of APMP from the date of communication made in this regard, for violation of provisions of 1.4.2 of IMC Regulations, 2002. (ii) In Case No.15/2009, i.e. the complaint made by Sri M.Prabhakar Rao, the statements of the parties concerned be on record. (iii) In Case No.03/2009, i.e. the complaint made by Sri Md.Reyaz Pasha against Dr.Sameer Diwale, Dr.K.Satyanarayana and another of Kamineni Hospitals / Wockhardt Heart Centre, Hyderabad, it is resolved that a letter be addressed to the Management of the hospital to refund the extra amount which was charged from the patient. (iv) In Case No.08/2009, i.e the complaint made by Sri Kotla Raju, it is resolved that the conclusion of E&MPC that there is definite negligence on the part of DMO and Anaesthetist on duty and also vicarious responsibility on the Professor of Medicine / Professor of Anesthesiology while discharging their duties. It is also resolved that the E&MPC shall made shall make specific recommendation as to the punishment to be given to the respondent doctors. (v) In Case No.20/2008, i.e. the Complaint made by Ms.L.Suvarna against Dr.S.V. Adinarayana Rao, Prema Hospitals, Visakhapatnam, it is resolved that the complaint made by Ms.L.Suvarna be closed in the light of assurance given by the Respondent Dr.S.V.Adinarayana Rao to give her proper Physio-therapy to enable her to walk properly. It is also resolved that a report be sent to the National Human Rights Commission accordingly.(vi) In Case No.16/2009, i.e. the complaint made by Sri Meduri Ramesh Chandra against Dr.G.V.Jagadambha and M.Bharathi, it is resolved that the respondents do not fall within the jurisdiction of APMC as they are non-medical Forensic Experts. It is also resolved that the complainant be addressed so that he may represent the matter before the concerned authorities for redressal of his grievance.

5. TO CONSIDER THE REPORT OF CME COMMITTEE DT: 27.08.2009

AS APPROVED BY THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE.

It is resolved that the report of the CME Committee dt:27.08.2009

be approved as per the modifications made by the Executive

Committee. It is also resolved that in conducting CME Programmes, the

main bodies like APGDA, APNA etc. be considered. It is also resolved that

the letters “RMP”/“PMP” shall be omitted and replaced with the words

“Community Para Medic” or use the word Quacks where the context

permits.

6. TO CONSIDER THE REPORT OF THE FINANCE COMMITTEE DT:15-

09-2009 AS APPROVED BY THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE.

It is resolved that the report of the Finance Committee dt:

27.08.2009 be approved as per the approval given by the Executive

Committee. It is also resolved that on introduction of Challan System,

there shall be weekly reconciliation. It is also resolved that payment of

fee shall be allowed through Demand Drafts wherever necessary.

7. TO CONSIDER REGULARISATION OF THE SERVICES OF SRI

G.ANIL KUMAR,

JUNIOR ASSISTANT

It is resolved that the services of Sri G.Anil Kumar, Junior Assistant be


01.08.2009 as he completed one year of satisfactory service in the post of Junior

Assistant on that date.

8. TO CONSIDER REGULARISATION OF THE SERVICES OF SRI

V.SURESH,

OFFICE SUBORDINATE

It is resolved that the services of Sri V.Suresh, Office Subordinate be


01.08.2009 as he completed one year of satisfactory service in the post of Office

Subordinate on that date.

9. TO CONSIDER CREATION OF ONE POST OF JR. ASSISTANT

W.E.F.01-10-2009 FOR APPOINTMENT OF SMT.L.MADHAVI

LATHA IN THE REGULAR SCALE OF PAY.

It is resolved that the legal opinion given by Sri V.V.Anil Kumar,

Standing Counsel, APMC with regard to the power of Andhra Pradesh

Medical Council in terms of Section-13 of APMPR Act, 1968 for creation

of a vacancy be approved. It is also resolved that a post be created

w.e.f.01.10.2009 in the cadre of Junior Assistant. It is further resolved

that Smt.L.Madhavi Latha be appointed in the regular scale of pay

attached to the post of Junior Assistant w.e.f.01.10.2009.


CHAIRMAN.


REGISTRAR CHAIRMAN APMC APMC

5 Minutes

Documents

Transcript of 5 Minutes