Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service determination — substantive hearing
Suspended from practice — 5 months
The regulator’s term: suspension
What does “suspended from practice” mean?
A suspension is a fixed-term pause on the right to practise. The practitioner cannot work in the regulated profession during the suspension. At the end of the period the suspension may be extended, replaced with another sanction, or lifted on review.
Concerning Milind Gadgil, doctor (General Medical Council 8033548).
Decision date: 14 April 2026 · Hearing started 30 March 2026 and ended 14 April 2026
In plain English
The MPTS tribunal found that Dr Milind Gadgil dishonestly failed to declare on a 2024 NHS job application that he had been dismissed in Nebraska after attending work over the alcohol limit, and failed to tell the GMC that medical boards in Nebraska, Maryland, Tennessee, Maine and Texas had suspended his licence to practise. The tribunal found his fitness to practise was impaired by misconduct. It suspended his registration for five months, directed a review hearing, and imposed an immediate order.
Charges
On 1 May 2023, while working at Regional West Medical Center in Nebraska, Dr Gadgil arrived at work with breathalyser readings of .222 and .259 and was dismissed. The Nebraska medical board suspended his licence for six months following an Agreed Settlement signed on 12 March 2024. The Maryland, Tennessee, Maine and Texas boards subsequently suspended his licence. On his GMC registration applications dated 1 September 2023 and 12 October 2023 he failed to declare licences in Nebraska, Maine, Maryland, Texas, Tennessee, Utah, Wisconsin, Alabama and Minnesota; the Tribunal found this was dishonest. On a 26 March 2024 NHS job application to Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Trust he denied any dismissals or sanctions; the Tribunal found this was dishonest. He also failed to notify the GMC of any of the overseas suspension determinations.
Findings
The Tribunal found that Dr Gadgil's conduct in failing to declare overseas licences and prior regulatory matters to the GMC, and in dishonestly answering the NHS Trust application form after he had signed the Nebraska Agreed Settlement, amounted to serious professional misconduct and dishonesty. It found his fitness to practise was impaired in respect of paragraphs 11, 12, 15 and 16 of the Allegation. It found his fitness to practise was not currently impaired in respect of the original conduct that led to dismissal in Nebraska (allegation 1) or in respect of the GMC application dishonesty (allegations 2-5), having taken into account context relating to his health at the relevant times, but found that public confidence required a finding of impairment in respect of the dishonest NHS Trust application and the failures to notify the GMC of overseas determinations.
Mitigating and aggravating factors
Aggravating factors
The Tribunal identified that the misconduct undermined a system designed to protect the public, in that Dr Gadgil's failures to provide accurate information to his regulator and prospective NHS employer deprived them of the ability to investigate his professional and regulatory history.
Source
All facts on this page are drawn from the publicly published Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service determination linked below. MedicWatch does not editorialise the regulator’s findings.
Spot something incorrect?
If a fact on this page is wrong, or you believe the page should not be published, please submit a correction or takedown request.