The Delhi High Court on Wednesday sought the Central Government response on a public interest litigation (PIL) challenging an appointment to the position of “embryologist” within the National Assisted Reproductive Technology and Surrogacy Board.
A bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Saurabh Banerjee issued notices to both the central government and Dr. Nitiz Murdia.
Dr. Murdia’s appointment as an expert member on the panel has been questioned on the basis that he lacks the necessary qualifications and training for the role.
Dr. Aniruddha Narayan Malpani, an IVF specialist, filed the petition. He asserted that Murdia, who is a chemical engineer, lacks any evidence of embryology training from a recognized university.
The petitioner’s legal representatives, Mohini Priya and Ivan, argued that section 17(2)(f) of the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act mandates the inclusion of an “eminent embryologist” in the National Board. The petitioner contended that Murdia’s professional history indicates a focus on managerial and marketing roles, rather than the required expertise in embryology.
The petition stated, “There is no proof of Respondent No. 2 holding the requisite qualification of at least 15 years as an ‘Embryologist’ required to be an Expert member of the National Board as provided in the notification dated 16.06.2022.”
Furthermore, the plea alleged that Murdia secured the appointment based on false and misleading information, thereby taking on a public office without the necessary qualifications and training as stipulated by the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021, the Assisted Reproductive Technologies Act, 2021, and the associated Rules.
The petition highlighted that while an RTI response indicated that Murdia holds a Ph.D. from California Public University in “Embryology, IVF Health, and Business,” the petitioner’s investigations revealed that the university solely offers online/distance education programs without conferring academic credits.
