What IMA Wants?? (
Highlights of Odd Points Of NCHRH Bill
- All bodies should be autonomous to effectively implement the jobs entrusted to them. Sec 12, 87, 86 and 93 need to be deleted. Provision of an inquiry commission should be there to look into the complaints against these bodies or officials as laid down u/s 30 of MCI Act 1956.
- The provision of engaging private Evaluation and Assessment agencies to inspect health educational institutes is not desirable. ( sec 37) It should be done by the inspectors nominated amongst the members of the National Councils. Supporting staff can be appointed by the NCs.
- Punishment u/s 81 for violation of sec 33 should be done away with. It is very severe and should be deleted. Because just obtaining degree from abroad without eligibility certificate from Board shouldn’t be equated with violation of section 17 & 57. Moreover if such a person practices without registration he will attract punishment u/s 79 & 80. So it is redundant and will cause unnecessary harassment of medical graduates taking degree from abroad at the hand of over zealous officials.
- Sec 100 which bars challenging of removal of name from state register should be deleted. It is unconstitutional and is against the fundamental principles of constitution. No law can bar the citizen of India from seeking a judicial recourse for getting relief against the decision of a regulatory body. Further a single body can’t be investigating, prosecuting, judging and then final super punishing authority whose decision is UN- challenge able in the court of Law. It is against natural justice.
- Clause 2-6 of Part I of 7th Sch. need clarification in very clear simple wording. The provisions under these are worded in a very confusing way and it is not possible to understand what the framers of the law have in mind and what is the exact purpose of these.
- Similarly Clause 11 of part II of 7th Schedule needs clarification that whether advertisement with certain riders is allowed or not.