With the Supreme Court’s warning note to striking doctors, legal experts are confused whether medicos could be hauled up under the present circumstances.
NEW DELHI: While the Supreme Court’s warning note to striking doctors is armed with the controversial verdict that government employees (doctors included) don’t have any “moral, equitable justification” for such action, legal experts are confused whether medicos could be hauled up under the present circumstances.
“Like lawyers, doctors also don’t have the right to strike,” says lawyer Prashant Bhushan, but the “issue is whether they could face contempt merely because the issue is pending hearing by the apex court”.
“I don’t think continuing with any strike even though the issue is being heard by the court could amount to contempt of the court,” opines Bhushan.
Nevertheless, the court could initiate contempt against the strikers for violating its judgment that bars strike by medical professionals, he adds.
On a somewhat different footing, noted civil rights advocate Colin Gonsalves says she doesn’t dispute the court’s power to initiate contempt as it has expressed concern for the ailing millions. “If doctors don’t call off the strike, the petitions could be disposed off accordingly,’’ Gonzales feels. “Monday’s warning could be called the judges’ point of view and nothing more. One may agree with that view or disagree, that won’t be contempt,” Gonsalves added.
In its judgment in the case relating to a strike by Tamil Nadu government employees, the apex court had ruled that “apart from statutory rights, government employees cannot claim that they can take the society at ransom by going on strike. Even if there is injustice to some extent as presumed by such employees, in a democratic welfare state, they have to resort to the machinery provided under different statutory provisions for redressal of their grievances,” the judges added.
“Strike as a weapon is mostly misused which results in chaos and total misadministration. In the case of strike by doctors, innocent patients suffer,” it added. Former Attorney General Soli J Sorabjee said “its against the fundamental rights”.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}