HC seeks Sudhir Gupta's reply on AIIMS' plea for his removal

The Delhi High Court today sought the response of AIIMS forensic department head Sudhir Kumar Gupta, who had alleged discrimination after he claimed to have refused to act unprofessionally in the Sunanda Pushkar autopsy matter, on a plea by the institute seeking his replacement.
A bench of Justices G S Sistani and Sangita Dhingra Sehgal also issued notice to Gupta on the plea of All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) which also sought the court's permission to appoint Dr D N Bhardwaj as the new head of its Forensic Medicine and Toxicology Department.
"Issue notice. List the matter for July 23," the bench said, adding that Gupta should file an affidavit before the next date of hearing.

The application was moved by AIIMS against the backdrop of the court's March 25 direction by which it had asked AIIMS to take its permission before replacing Gupta.
Senior advocate Amarendra Sharan and advocate Amit Kumar, appearing for Gupta, opposed the application moved by AIIMS.
The court's March 25 order had come on Gupta's plea challenging a March 4 decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) rejecting his charge that one Dr O P Murty was promoted after purging his seniority, with the purpose of obtaining a "tailor-made report" in the sensational murder case of Sunanda Pushkar Tharoor.

Gupta had also alleged that AIIMS had illegally purged his seniority with "malafide intention" to punish him for refusing to act unprofessionally in the autopsy matter.

Meanwhile, BJP leader Subramanian Swamy also filed an application seeking court's permission to be heard in the matter.
Swamy informed the court that even though the issue related to service matter, the alleged controversy was of public interest and so he wanted to address the court on it.
The BJP leader said that Gupta's decision not to give favourable report in Sunanda Pushkar case was correct.
In its application, AIIMS had said that Bhardwaj was senior to Gupta by four years and the latter had not challenged the former's seniority either before CAT or in the high court.