The report on Private Practice Violations in Uttar Pradesh reveals a concerning trend of apathy from the government in addressing these issues.
Numerous private healthcare providers operate without proper licenses.
They violate established regulations designed to ensure patient safety and quality care.
The lack of stringent enforcement mechanisms and accountability has allowed these practices to flourish.
This undermines public health initiatives and contributes to disparities in healthcare access.
Additionally, citizens remain largely unaware of their rights.
This leads to a cycle of exploitation that further highlights the urgent need for government intervention.
Comprehensive policy reforms are necessary to protect patients and regulate private practice effectively.
The key takeaway from the blog post is that:
Administrative loopholes and the “PPP” (Public-Private Partnership) model allow individuals to bypass the ban on private practice for government doctors in Uttar Pradesh.
These practices undermine the intent of the ban.
They raise concerns regarding ethical healthcare delivery.
The analysis reveals three critical points:
- Structural Loopholes: The case of Dr. Santosh Shukla demonstrates how doctors can maintain a “government” status for state duties, such as the Mahakumbh Mela. At the same time, they can work for private entities, like the Heritage Institute, under the guise of PPP projects.
- Accountability Vacuum: Senior medical officials (CMO and Additional Director) claimed a lack of jurisdiction over PPP-managed wings, creating a “shadow zone” where government conduct rules are difficult to enforce.
- Reactive vs. Proactive Governance: The resignation of the specific doctor only “resolved” the grievance. This situation highlights a systemic failure where the government responds to individual complaints instead of addressing the underlying corruption that allows such dual-roles to exist across the state.
Ultimately, the post argues that without stricter oversight of PPP-mode facilities, the state’s mission to provide “Good Governance” and protect the low income people from medical exploitation remains compromised.
Report on Private Practice Violations: Probing the Shadow Economy of Private Practice in Uttar Pradesh
The sanctity of the public healthcare system rests on a simple, foundational principle: a government doctor’s primary allegiance is to the state and its citizens. However, a recent grievance filed by activist Yogi M.P. Singh (Registration No: GOVUP/E/2025/0020150) has pulled back the curtain on a complex web of dual-identities, institutional oversight failures, and the blurred lines of Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) in Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh.
This case is not merely about one individual; it is a diagnostic report on the systemic “anarchy and corruption” that continues to plague the medical department despite decades of prohibitory government orders.
The Core Conflict: When Protectors Become Predators
At the heart of the complaint is a fundamental violation of the Uttar Pradesh Government Servant Conduct Rules. The state has issued numerous circulars and office memoranda strictly forbidding government doctors from engaging in private practice. The rationale is clear: private practice creates a conflict of interest, leads to the diversion of patients from free public facilities to expensive private clinics, and results in the “exploitation of the weaker and downtrodden sections.”
The complainant invokes Article 51A of the Constitution, emphasizing that citizens have a fundamental duty to uphold the spirit of the law. In this instance, the “spirit” being violated is the promise of “Good Governance” (Su-shasan), which the highest offices of the state and central governments tout.
The Case Study: The Curious Case of Dr. Santosh Shukla
The grievance specifically highlights the activities of Dr. Santosh Shukla. Evidence provided by the complainant showed a dual existence that defies standard medical regulations:
- Public Duty: Records indicated Dr. Shukla was under the monitoring of the Chief Medical Officer (CMO) Mirzapur, performing critical duties during the Mahakumbh Mela at Pakka Ghat, Vindhyachal.
- The PPP Gray Area: Simultaneously, Dr. Shukla was associated with the Mother and Child Health (MCH) Wing of the District Women Hospital. This wing operates on a Public-Private Partnership (PPP) mode, managed by the private Heritage Institute of Medical Science.
This raises a piercing question: How can a doctor, categorized as “government staff” for state-led events like the Mahakumbh, simultaneously work under the private management of a PPP entity? The complainant argues that this is “private practice behind the screen,” happening under the very nose of the district’s vigilance committee.
Institutional Inertia and the Vigilance Gap
Uttar Pradesh has established a robust-looking hierarchy to curb these practices. A District Level Vigilance Committee exists, chaired by the District Magistrate (DM) and including the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) and the CMO as Member Secretary.
Despite this structure, the grievance alleges a state of “procrastination.” The CMO’s office, while serving as the watchdog, is accused of allowing a culture where patients are referred to private nursing homes to increase “back door income.” This phenomenon creates a predatory environment where the poorest citizens, seeking “free” government care, are instead funneled into a cycle of debt and private medical expenses.
The “PPP” Shield: A Loophole for Accountability?
The investigation into Dr. Shukla’s status revealed a startling administrative defense. When queried, the Additional Director of Medical Health and Family Welfare (Vindhyachal Division) shifted the responsibility. The official report (Letter No: A.N./V.M./IGRS/2025-26/143) stated:
“The MCH Wing is operated by Heritage on PPP mode, which is not under the control of the undersigned.”
This statement exposes a dangerous regulatory vacuum. If a facility is located within a government hospital complex but managed by a private entity, who ensures the doctors therein aren’t violating state conduct rules? This “not under our control” defense allows for a shadow economy where government-affiliated doctors can bypass the ban on private practice by hiding behind the veil of a PPP contract.
Resolution or Redaction? The Resignation Escape
In a move typical of high-pressure grievances, the case reached a swift “closure” only after a specific development: Dr. Santosh Shukla resigned in March 2025.
The official response dated May 1, 2025, used this resignation to effectively close the matter. While the complainant expressed satisfaction that a “relevant report” was finally submitted without “roundabout replies,” the underlying issue remains. The resignation of one doctor does not fix the systemic flaw that allowed the dual-practice to occur in the first place. It is a tactical exit that leaves the broader “anarchy” unaddressed.
The Economic and Ethical Toll
The persistence of private practice among government doctors has three devastating effects:
- Resource Drain: Public resources (salaries, infrastructure, and reputation) are used to build a patient base that is eventually monetized in the private sector.
- Erosion of Trust: When a doctor in a government uniform suggests a private clinic, the patient’s trust in the State is irreparably broken.
- The Destiny of the Low Income People: As the complainant poignantly asks, “If predators be protectors, then who will decide the destiny?” For the marginalized, a functioning government hospital is often the only thing standing between life and financial ruin.
Moving Forward: Beyond the Paper Trail
For “Good Governance” to be more than a slogan, the Government of Uttar Pradesh must move beyond the issuance of repetitive circulars. The following steps are essential:
- Unified Oversight: PPP-mode wings must remain under the strict disciplinary oversight of the CMO and DM regarding staff conduct.
- Digital Tracking: Implementation of real-time biometric and duty-tracking systems that are cross-referenced with private practice registrations.
- Whistleblower Protection: Strengthening the IGRS portal to ensure that activists like Yogi M.P. Singh can report these irregularities without facing administrative stonewalling.
The closure of case PMOPG/E/2025/0026174 may have ended the inquiry into one doctor, but the battle against the “back door income” culture in Uttar Pradesh’s medical corridors is far from over. True success will not be measured by resignations, but by a healthcare system where a government doctor’s only clinic is the one provided by the State.
Based on the official records and administrative details from your grievance, here is the structured contact information for the public authorities and entities involved in this case.
1. Primary Grievance Identifiers (Report on Private Practice Violations)
These are the registration numbers for the cases mentioned in your records:
- State Level (IGRS UP):
GOVUP/E/2025/0020150 - Central Level (PMO):
PMOPG/E/2025/0026174 - Reference Number:
60000250045984
2. Key Public Authorities (Uttar Pradesh) (Report on Private Practice Violations)
| Office / Authority | Key Contact Person | Email Address | Phone / Mobile |
| Chief Minister Secretariat | Shri Arvind Mohan (Joint Secretary) | arvind.12574@gov.in | 0522-2226350 |
| Chief Minister Office (General) | — | cmup@nic.in | CM Helpline: 1076 |
| Directorate of Med. & Health | Director General (DGHS) | janhithealthup@gmail.com | 0522-4150500 |
| Addl. Director (Vindhyachal) | Additional Director | admhmzp1@gmail.com | 8005192626 |
| Chief Medical Officer (CMO) Mirzapur | Member Secretary, Vigilance | cmomzp@gmail.com | 9454455171 / 05442-252337 |
3. Private Entity (PPP Partner) (Report on Private Practice Violations)
Heritage Institute of Medical Sciences (HIMS)
- Campus Address: NH-2 (G.T. Road Bypass), Bhadwar, Varanasi – 221311, U.P.
- Email:
info@heritageimshospital.com/hr@heritageims.com - Phone: 0542-7111071 / 7408602222
- Website: heritageims.com
4. Official Web Links (Report on Private Practice Violations)
- Jansunwai (IGRS) Portal: jansunwai.up.nic.in
- UP Medical & Health Services: uphealth.up.nic.in
- District Mirzapur Official Site: mirzapur.nic.in
- CPGRAMS (PMO Grievance): pgportal.gov.in
5. Administrative Address (Report on Private Practice Violations)
Room No. 321, U.P. Secretariat,
Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh – 226001
Would you like me to prepare a draft for a “Rejoinder” or a fresh appeal based on the “lack of control” claim made by the Additional Director regarding the PPP unit?
Facing a similar challenge? Share the details in the box below, and our team of experts will do their best to help.