Debangsu Basak, J. - (1.) A decision of the Medical Council of India, dated May 26, 2017 is under challenge in the present writ petition.
(2.) Learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that, the Medical Council of India has assumed jurisdiction de hors the provisions of Regulation 8.7 of the Indian Medical Council (Professional Conduct, Etiquette and Ethics) Regulations, 2002. He has submitted that, the provisions of Regulations 8.7 permits the Medical Council of India to withdraw a complaint pending before a State Medical Council, if the State Medical Council has not decided such complaint within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the complaint by it. However, the Medical Council of India has to assign sufficient reasons so as to transfer the proceedings to itself for consideration. He submits that, the Medical Council of India has not given any reasons for withdrawing the complaint pending against the petitioner before the West Bengal Medical Council. In fact, the Ethics Committee of Medical Council has purported to take up the complaint made by private respondent to it. The Ethics Committee has no jurisdiction to do so. The Medical Council is alone empowered to withdraw a proceeding, which admittedly in the facts of the present case it has not done so. Therefore, the assumption of jurisdiction by the Medical Council of India is bad. The Ethics Committee has no jurisdiction to withdraw the complaint and decide the same as sought to be done in the present case. He refers to Section 20A of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 and Section 33(m) of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 as also Section 25 of the Bengal Medical Act, 1914. He submits that, the Medical Council of India has no power to punish as such power is vested only with the State Medical Council.
(3.) The writ petition is being opposed by the respondent no. 5 appearing in person and the Medical Council of India. The Bengal Medical Council and the State are also represented.;