The Madras high court has said the government servant, who is rendering public services, should not be sent for any reason on deputation out of India, pulling up the state government for sending a doctor in government service to Foreign Service.

It is high time, the government took appropriate steps as a matter of policy to ensure that none of the doctors from our country are deputed to any other country either on deputation or otherwise, as there is already a shortage of such professionals in our country.

Justice R. Mahadevan made the remark while dismissing a petition from Dr. D. Lilly Manoharan which was represented by her power agent and husband T. Alexandar Devaraj, to cancel an order of the state health secretary, of removing her from service, for overstaying abroad without permission.

The judge said that the petitioners wife was a doctor by profession and it is still not known the reason she was sent out of India, when she was in government service. The country is already facing a lack of medical professional proportionate to attend to those suffering from various ailments, then sending a doctor in government service to Foreign Service is not justified.

Medical profession is one of the noblest professions among all the professions, all over the world. The responsibilities attached to the post of a doctor are less significant than the privileges they could enjoy. In our country, doctor is considered as a saviour at all times and is highly responsible person to save human life. Throughout the globe, the doctor’s profession is the most demanding said the judge.

The judge has dismissed the petition, saying even though the authorities have initiated disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner’s wife during the year 1997 for her overstay abroad beyond the one permitted, when she came back to India in 2002, surprisingly, she was allowed to join duty without any scrutiny as to the continuance of the departmental proceedings against her, even after her joining, during 2003.

Even after issuing show cause notice during 1997, nothing has progressed till 2003, when the petitioner’s wife was hastily permitted to join duty. Also, she once again remained absent and at least at this stage, the authorities have to quickly proceed with the departmental proceedings. Finally, the authorities suspended her from service on March 30, 2004, just one day prior to her retirement and reserved their right to proceed against her departmentally. Later, the authorities conducted enquiry and passed an order on January 25, 2015, to remove her from service, which was questioned in this petition.

The judge also said that the inaction on the part of the respondents (authorities) has been given rise to the filing of the present petition by the petitioner claiming equity, which the respondents (authorities) could have avoided. As a result, this court exclusively directs that the respondents (health authorities) herein and all other departments shall not repeat such lapses in future and make sure that steps are taken immediately, when law-breaking is committed by the government servant.