PESHAWAR: The Medical Teaching Institutions Appellate Tribunal has ordered the attachment of salaries of the hospital and medical directors of Hayatabad Medical Complex and a director of the attached Institute of Kidney Diseases (IKD) until further orders over failure to respond to an appeal of some employees against the abolition of their share in the charges of radiology and pathology tests.

The three-member tribunal headed by chairman Justice Nisar Hussain ordered the HMC’s hospital and medical directors, the secretary of its board of governors, and the director of IKD to appear before it on the next hearing on June 2 besides submitting reply to the appeal within a week.

It took exception to the issue as neither the reply was filed by the officials nor did any of their representative turn up during the hearing into the appeal filed by Prof Malik Zeb and several other doctors, who challenged the abolition of their share in the charges of tests done by the radiology and pathology departments.

Calls them over abolition of staff’s share in radiology, pathology test fee

Last month, the tribunal had admitted the appeal to regular hearing and sought the response of the respondents.

The tribunal is empowered under the MTI Act, 2015, to adjudicate on the grievances of all MTI staff members.

The appellants, who are pathologists and radiologists of HMC and IKD, had filed the appeals saying by misinterpreting the amendments to the MTI Act, the BoG had withdrawn their share, which was even unattractive, in the user charges of the two departments.

When the tribunal took up the appeal, it observed that during the previous hearing on May 6, the counsel for the respondents was present and directions were issued to the IKD director and HMC medical and hospital directors to file response with a fortnight.

The tribunal observed that despite the acceptance of notice by the counsel, no one appeared on their behalf nor did they file reply.

“This indifferent and contumacious conduct of the respondents is highly deplorable which cannot be overlooked,” the tribunal observed.

Senior advocate Mian Muhibullah Kakakhel appeared for the appellants and said the radiology and pathology were those specialties to which doctors rarely opted due to low salaries and limited work opportunities and professional development opportunities.

He said the government decided in 2005 to give shares to doctors in total earnings per test done through a devised formula.

The lawyer said the appellants opted for the specialty due to that formula and were currently heads of departments and professors.

He said those were diagnostics-based specialties and his clients provided services in HMC and IKD round the clock with one team serving in the morning and another at night.

The lawyer said the government introduced the concept of institution-based practice through the MTI Act, 2015, under which all the doctors, who could perform in their personal capacity and ran clinics later, were asked to examine patients in the place, which they used in the morning.

He said through MTI (Amendment) Act, 2018, the petitioners i.e. radiologists and pathologists were also made subject to it and in case they didn’t opt for IBP, they won’t be given share.

The lawyer said the 2018 amendment to the MTI Act was being destructively interpreted against appellants to whom it was not applicable and that their unattractive shares were being unreasonably stopped.

Published in Dawn, May 26th, 2021