Another disciplinary action pending against Dr Kafeel Khan, UP govt informs Allahabad HC

Prayagraj (Uttar Pradesh): In a case related to the suspension of Gorakhpur paediatrician Kafeel Ahmad Khan, the Uttar Pradesh government informed the Allahabad High Court that an independent disciplinary proceeding was initiated against him in another matter and an order of suspension was separately passed on it.

The action has been taken for the period he was attached to the office of director, medical education, after being suspended in August 2017 for his alleged role in oxygen shortage which claimed the lives of over 60 children at Gorakhpur's BRD Medical College.

The government told the court on Thursday that a separate order of suspension was passed against him.

"This proceeding is still to conclude and the order of this suspension continues to hold the field," additional advocate general, Manish Goyal, said in court.

The high court is hearing the petition of Dr Kafeel, who has challenged his suspension from service on August 22, 2017.

Earlier, on August 6, 2021, the state government had informed the high court about the disciplinary authority's order dated February 24, 2020, whereby further inquiry was directed.

Justice Yashwant Varma has now directed the state government to bring on record by way of an affidavit, within two weeks, the later suspension order as well as other necessary facts relating to the initial order of suspension dated August 22, 2017, by which Dr Kafeel was suspended.

The court has fixed August 31 as the next date of hearing of the matter.

In the present writ petition, Dr Kafeel Khan has challenged the order of suspension dated August 2017, he has said that the proceedings were initially drawn against nine persons.

"Seven out of those who were suspended along with the petitioner have since been reinstated pending the conclusion of disciplinary proceedings," he stated.

In its order dated July 29, 2021, the high court while taking note of this submission, had observed, "The respondents are obliged to justify the continuance of the order of suspension which has continued for more than four years."