Tej Kumar Kundra
Introduction
Tej Kumar Kundra is a UK dentist, GDC registration number 261319, whose name was directed erased from the Dental Register by the General Dental Council’s (GDC’s) Professional Conduct Committee (PCC) on 6 February 2026, after the Committee found his fitness to practise impaired by reason of a conviction for fraud by false representation. The conviction arose from false NHS Band 3 treatment claims — some 730 units of dental activity (UDAs) across 77 patients, for treatment that never took place — submitted while he worked at a dental practice between April 2021 and June 2022, running up an overpayment of more than £22,000 to the public purse. Kundra admitted the charge and was erased with an immediate suspension order.
Background Information
Kundra was working at a dental practice in the material period, 1 April 2021 to 28 June 2022, submitting NHS claims for UDAs. The matter came to light in May 2022 when a patient’s son approached the practice manager: the family had received a £382.80 penalty charge notice for Band 3 treatment the patient never had — she had received only an examination, a Band 1 claim. The practice’s internal audit found multiple false Band 3 claims for treatment Kundra had not undertaken, and the practice notified the NHS England Counter Fraud Authority. The subsequent investigation identified false claims equating to some 730 UDAs across 77 patients, an overpayment of £22,722.61, of which Kundra personally received £9,581.00.
The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation
Adjudicated vs. alleged. Kundra pleaded guilty and was convicted; the conviction is a court-record fact. Accounts of motive come from his own evidence and the Committee’s findings and are attributed. The sanction is a PCC determination.
Suspended by the practice after a June 2022 meeting in which he could not say whether he had carried out any or all of the treatment claimed, he made full admissions at a second meeting in July 2022. In September 2022 he was interviewed under caution by an NHS England counter-fraud specialist and accepted that he had made and inflated false Band 3 claims, saying he was scared the practice would claw money back if he did not meet his UDA targets. He self-referred to the GDC on 15 September 2022. He pleaded guilty at a magistrates’ court on 7 December 2023, and on 20 February 2024 was convicted at Snaresbrook Crown Court of fraud by false representation, contrary to sections 1(2)(a) and 2 of the Fraud Act 2006, receiving a one-year community order with 200 hours of unpaid work and a 15-day rehabilitation activity requirement.
At the GDC hearing, held 3–5 February 2026, Kundra admitted the conviction charge through his counsel and the Committee found it proved under Rule 17(4) of the GDC (Fitness to Practise) Rules. In oral evidence he accepted the seriousness of his actions and told the Committee he had “lost my clinical and non-clinical integrity and performed dishonest actions out of greed”. He cited family matters and workplace pressures as triggers, but the Committee was not convinced, finding he had “created this false narrative to excuse your actions, rather than admit your true motive, namely one of greed”. It nonetheless accepted that the proceedings had had a profoundly chastening effect, such that the risk of repetition was very low.
Public Reaction and Consequences
The Committee found the dishonesty extremely serious: Kundra had breached “one of the fundamental tenets of the profession – namely to be honest and trustworthy”, conduct liable to bring the profession into disrepute. Aggravating factors were premeditated conduct persisting over an extended period, personal financial gain amounting to a defrauding of the public purse, abuse of his position of trust, and deliberately falsified records for 77 patients; a patient had received a penalty notice as a direct result of his claims, and the false records could have compromised patient care. Mitigation included his admissions, guilty plea, repayment, remorse and good conduct since the events. As there were no clinical concerns or patient-safety issues, impairment was found solely on public-interest grounds.
On sanction, the Committee found no action, a reprimand, conditions and suspended registration each insufficient, concluding Kundra “was motivated by greed” and that such “profoundly dishonest behaviour, directly linked to your practice as a Dentist, is fundamentally incompatible with continued registration”. It applied paragraphs 282(a), (d), (f) and (h) of the GDC’s guidance and directed erasure. It gave limited weight to testimonials that predated the conviction, and cited the sentencing judge’s remark that the offence “erodes the public’s trust in what is an important profession”. Kundra’s counsel argued for a 12-month suspension with review, noting three years already spent under an interim suspension order, but the Committee found erasure the only appropriate and proportionate sanction, then revoked the interim order and imposed an immediate order of suspension under section 30(1) of the Dentists Act 1984 in the public interest.
Current Status
Kundra was erased with immediate suspension: as of the 6 February 2026 determination his registration is suspended, and unless he appeals, the erasure takes effect when the 28-day appeal period expires; if he appeals, the immediate suspension remains in force pending the appeal. The Committee noted his rehabilitation requirement and probation ended in October 2024, with the sentence remaining active until 19 February 2025, and that he repaid the money owed. No appeal is recorded in the published determination.
Impact on Their Career/Life
Erasure removes Kundra from the Dental Register: he may no longer practise as a dentist in the UK, and under the GDC regime a person erased may apply for restoration only after five years — a gap his counsel framed as roughly eight years out of dentistry. The findings leave a defined professional record: premeditated, sustained dishonesty for financial gain, abuse of a position of trust, and falsified records for 77 patients. The determination records substantial remediation — around 145 hours of non-clinical CPD on legal, ethical and probity matters, some 104 hours of clinical CPD, mentorship since October 2022, a one-to-one ethics course with a legal ethicist and integrative psychotherapist, and volunteering at a Cancer Research shop and a hospice. What he does next professionally is not recorded.