After standoff with DM, Kanpur chief medical officer suspended
Following a high-profile bureaucratic standoff, the state government has suspended Kanpur's chief medical officer (CMO) Dr Hari Dutt Nemi who was embroiled in months of tension with district magistrate Jitendra Pratap Singh.
The suspension order also attaches Dr Nemi to the state headquarters and initiates a departmental inquiry into alleged irregularities in the appointment of doctors, as well as procedural and administrative lapses. Dr Nemi has said he will challenge his suspension in court.
Dr Udaynath, additional CMO from Shravasti, has been appointed as the new Kanpur CMO.
The administrative action comes a day after Hindustan Times prominently featured the controversy.
The state government has cited three key grounds for Dr Nemi's suspension: failure to publish recruitment notices on the National Health Mission's website, delay in releasing interview results despite specific directives, and relieving a senior finance officer from statutory responsibilities in violation of protocol.
After his suspension, Dr Nemi sent a letter to chief minister Yogi Adityanath and held a press conference.
During the press conference, he alleged caste-based discrimination and extortion demands by the district magistrate. He claimed that the DM was angered when he refused to reverse the transfer of Dr Subodh Prakash Yadav—an ACMO accused of corruption and political bias—and that he was repeatedly humiliated for being a Dalit.
'The DM told me I lacked intelligence, could not understand the system, and didn't know how to earn money,' Dr Nemi alleged during the press conference.
Reacting to Dr Nemi's allegations, district magistrate Jitendra Pratap Singh said that publicly criticising an official suspension order and levelling baseless allegations against fellow officers amounts to gross indiscipline. He also said all relevant facts have been communicated to the competent authority and that appropriate action will be taken in accordance with procedure.
The tensions reportedly began on February 5, 2025, when the DM conducted a surprise inspection at the CMO's office and found 34 employees absent, prompting a public reprimand and salary deductions. Since then, administrative hostilities intensified, with mutual accusations of insubordination and corruption.
One of the most serious allegations levelled by Dr Nemi is that the DM pressured him to clear a payment of over ₹1.6 crore to JM Pharma—a firm reportedly chargesheeted by the CBI. The CMO claimed to have resisted the order, citing a 125-page departmental report and a warning letter issued by the senior finance officer.
The controversy soon spiralled. While a section of BJP MLAs from Kanpur had reportedly expressed support for Dr Nemi, others wrote to the chief minister demanding his immediate removal on grounds of alleged irregularities and insubordination.
Samajwadi Party president Akhilesh Yadav had also publicly taken a jibe over the issue.
Audio recordings purportedly featuring Dr Nemi and his driver had also surfaced. In one clip, Dr Nemi was heard criticising the DM in strong language.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
35 minutes ago
- Indian Express
A different nationalism: Let's go back to our Constitution
Written by Rahul Govind I will have to respectfully differ with the arguments of Yogendra Yadav and Akeel Bilgrami on nationalism. Bilgrami speaks of the 'unselfconscious pluralism' characterising 'centuries of Indian society', as reflected in Gandhian nationalism ('An alternative nationalism', IE, June 16), while Yadav maintains that once the modern Indian state is taken as a successor to Indian civilisation, the task is to define its 'cultural traits' ('The rediscovery of India', IE, June 5). Nirmal Verma is offered as a starting point for imagining a 'positive nationalism' that could save Indian civilisation from its 'inner disintegration' under colonialism (and the post-colonial state). This despite Yadav acknowledging that Verma 'hints at Hindus [being] the custodians of national unity and integrity', that he 'equivocated' on the role of Islam in Indian civilisation and exhibited a 'pronounced unease, if not denial, of the question of caste inequality' ('A critic of the modern Indian mind', IE, June, 17). Is this the beginning of a rethinking, or is this, instead, a pale reflection of the majoritarianism of the times? Indian nationalism drew on India's past, but drew equally from a global heritage involving ideas such as popular sovereignty and fundamental rights. Even after the Gandhian intervention and mass nationalism in the early 1920s, several factors led to the nationalist agenda, including critical reform on land and caste. This broadening of the terrain of struggle over social and economic rights was not sui generis to the initial Gandhian intervention. It was due to popular movements, and figures like B R Ambedkar, as well as Communists and Socialists. The crowning achievement was the Indian Constitution, which enshrined ideals regarding fundamental rights and universal franchise as well as social protections and land reform. Seeped in our consciousness of Indian nationalism is Gandhi's humiliation at the hands of racists on that infamous train from Durban to Pretoria. Much less known is Ambedkar's experience in Chalisgaon in 1929, in the midst of the national movement. As a part of a committee, appointed by the Bombay government to investigate caste oppression, he alighted at the railway station of Chalisgaon. When he was about to start his journey towards Maharwada, 'the quarters of the untouchables', he couldn't find a single tonga. After an hour or so, when he got one and paced towards his destination, the cart crashed, the horse bolted, and he was, in his own words, 'thrown down on the stone pavement', which resulted in a fractured leg and serious injuries. The accident occurred because the driver had never driven a tonga before. He was forced to do so because no tonga driver would agree to seat a Dalit in his carriage. In the same text, Waiting for a Visa, Ambedkar writes of a doctor refusing to attend to a Dalit's wife, resulting in her death. Just two years before the Chalisgaon incident, Ambedkar had the Manusmriti publicly burned in response to upper-caste attacks on Dalits who had drawn water from a public water tank. This kind of response against Dalits organising to access public spaces, schools, roads, and temples was not unusual. At the Mahad Satyagraha, Ambedkar invoked the ideals of the French Revolution, as he was to do in his Annihilation of Caste. Caste oppression was more fully addressed by the national movement because of popular campaigns around rights to representation, land and identity by figures like Ambedkar, who combated inherited legacies of discrimination using a global vocabulary of democratic rights. The inclusivity of the national movement, therefore, was not a civilisational inheritance. In the 1930s, Gandhi too invoked the 'secular' in the context of untouchability and temple entry, just as he came to accept the demand for a Constituent Assembly, a wholly 'modern' idea. There is a view that caste oppression was not native to our civilisation, but was imposed by the colonial state. Even if we credit the British with unmatched capacities in collective hypnosis, this argument cannot be taken seriously. Certainly, the British had no intention of establishing equality. But it is patently false to attribute caste violence and its hierarchical social arrangements solely to the colonial state, denying any role to Indians or Indian history. That caste hierarchy was a social and political reality before colonial rule is well established. Notwithstanding the riches of India's heritage, it would be historically inaccurate to think that one could find there a grammar for universal franchise, popular sovereignty, and justiciable fundamental rights, those distinctive features of our Constitution. This grammar emerged from a global conjuncture, and cannot be traced to any one historical or civilisational heritage, whether 'Western' or 'Indian'. The idea of a nation-state may be taken to be a political form where the nation, or the people, exercise sovereignty, expressed by institutional protocols such as elections, and regulated by norms such as equality, fundamental rights, including gender rights. The emergence of these ideas, including equality and liberty, cannot be understood without reference to revolutions such as the ones in France and Haiti. But these ideals were not intrinsic to some a priori nation called 'France', and it was not long before Napoleon reestablished the empire and slavery. Such ideals were not institutionalised in any 'Western' country, 'internally' or 'externally'. One can speak here of violent empires, not nation-states, arguably until the post-Second World War order. The contention that the ills of the day are caused by a small 'westernised' elite, and that one has to reach back to a corralled history, civilisational past or the nationalist movement to address contemporary challenges, is to misunderstand the past as much as the present. Nationalism ought to be judged good or ill depending on the extent to which it embodies popular will and universal values such as equality. Struggles over representation, caste, gender, federalism and welfare in the post-colonial state have parallels with the national movement as well as with those the world over, simply because a particular language of rights and constitution-making emerged in modernity. It is to the Constitution and a modern global heritage of rights and values that these movements turn. The benchmark of nationalism can only be the Constitution, a revolutionary and transformative document, not the echo of an ever-existing civilisational heritage. The writer teaches History at Delhi University
India Today
2 hours ago
- India Today
Video: Bengal school students use umbrellas in leaking classroom
6:06 Prime Minister Narendra Modi targeted the RJD over the recent controversy involving alleged disrespect to Dr. B.R. Ambedkar's portrait by Lalu Prasad Yadav. He asserted that the people of Bihar would never forgive those who insulted the architect of the Constitution. Addressing the state's sizeable Dalit population, Modi said, "RJD insulted Babasaheb Ambedkar, and Bihar will never forgive them."
India Today
2 hours ago
- India Today
PM Modi slams RJD and Congress, accuses them of bringing jungle raj in Bihar
6:06 Prime Minister Narendra Modi targeted the RJD over the recent controversy involving alleged disrespect to Dr. B.R. Ambedkar's portrait by Lalu Prasad Yadav. He asserted that the people of Bihar would never forgive those who insulted the architect of the Constitution. Addressing the state's sizeable Dalit population, Modi said, "RJD insulted Babasaheb Ambedkar, and Bihar will never forgive them."
