Row over bid to rename Mumbai’s KEM Hospital in centenary year

A proposal to rename Mumbai’s historic KEM Hospital has triggered a political and civic backlash, with doctors and the Shiv Sena (UBT) opposing the move even as it advances through municipal channels.

The hospital — formally the King Edward Memorial (KEM) Hospital in Parel — is marking its centenary year and is widely regarded as a lifeline for low-income patients from across India and beyond.

The controversy began after Maharashtra cabinet minister Mangal Prabhat Lodha wrote to the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), recommending that the hospital be renamed 'Kaushal Shreshtha Eklavya Smarak Hospital' in line with what he described as Indian cultural values. He said the abbreviated 'KEM' could be retained as a brand.

The proposal was taken up by the BMC’s health committee, which is controlled by the BJP. Committee chair Harish Bhandirge said the panel, “respecting the sentiment” behind the suggestion, had discussed and approved it, forwarding the proposal to the municipal commissioner for further consideration.

The move has drawn sharp criticism from sections of civil society and the medical community, who argue that renaming a century-old public institution risks erasing its legacy rather than preserving it. For many Mumbaikars, KEM represents decades of public trust and accessible healthcare, not just a colonial-era name.

Established on 22 January 1926, KEM Hospital is among Asia’s largest government-run medical institutions and is operated by the BMC alongside the Seth Gordhandas Sunderdas Medical College. It primarily serves economically vulnerable patients, offering treatment at relatively low cost.

Doctors staged a protest on Monday, joined by former Mumbai mayor Kishori Pednekar of the Shiv Sena (UBT), who met hospital dean Dr Sangeeta Rawat to express opposition. Two party MLAs were also present.

Lodha has faced criticism over the proposal, adding to earlier controversies around his remarks on the Jain community. He had suggested that Jainism is part of Hindu culture rather than a separate religion, prompting objections from within the community. Lalit Gandhi, national president of the Akhil Bharatiya Jain Minority Federation, described the suggestion as “ignorant” and part of a premeditated agenda, calling it a matter of identity for Jains.