The Chhattisgarh High Court has quashed the earlier enquiry report and directed a fresh investigation into a case where a patient was allegedly operated on the wrong knee, finding that the initial enquiry committee was improperly constituted. The dispute arose after the petitioner underwent knee surgery — she had originally complained of pain in her left knee, but the hospital operated on her right knee first. When the mistake was brought to light and the left knee was later also operated upon, she filed a complaint alleging medical negligence.
Under the relevant statute governing clinical establishments, the procedure for examining complaints of wilful medical negligence requires constitution of an enquiry committee headed by a senior official not below the rank of a Deputy Collector, along with a specialist doctor from the relevant discipline, as mandated by law. Rule 18 of the applicable rules stipulates these requirements. However, in this case, the committee set up comprised only doctors and was chaired by an Assistant Professor — falling short of the mandated standard. The Court observed that such a composition violates the statutory procedure, and therefore the enquiry report submitted by that committee “has no force in the eyes of law.”
As a result, the Court held that the conclusions drawn by the invalid committee — which had found no negligence on part of the hospital — cannot sustain any final decision. The writ petition filed by the patient was accordingly allowed, the earlier report set aside, and the supervisory authority was directed to reconsider the complaint afresh. A new committee must be constituted in accordance with the statutory provisions under the applicable law, and a fresh enquiry must be conducted.
In its order, the Court emphasised that legitimacy of medical‑negligence inquiries depends not just on the substance of the complaint, but on adherence to legally mandated procedure. It underscored that the statutory safeguards — including the requirement of appropriate composition of the enquiry committee — are not technicalities but vital protections ensuring impartial, lawful, and credible investigations when serious allegations of wrong treatment are made.
Accordingly, the matter is sent back for re‑examination from the beginning. The supervisory authority (the Collector, as provided under the statute) is required to initiate the process of constituting a properly constituted committee and ensure that the patient’s complaint is fairly, transparently and legally investigated.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.