PG Medical Students have to undergo mandatory government service: Karnataka HC
Bengaluru: The Division bench at Karnataka High Court has upheld the decision of single bench holding those medical students, who had availed admission to Post-Graduate (PG) Degree and Diploma courses under the All-India Quota, have to undergo mandatory government service.
This order was passed by the bench of honourable Acting Chief Justice L Narayana Swamy and Justice P S Dinesh Kumar while dismissing a writ appeal filed by Dr B R Varun and several others challenging the single bench verdict given on December 21.
The petitioners had availed the Government Medical Seats and joined their PG Degree/ PG Diploma courses in Clinical/Non-clinical subjects, in the academic years 2015 and 2016. The petitioners availed the said seats by furnishing the undertaking to serve the Government for a minimum period of three years by executing a duly stamped Bond.
After accomplishing the said degree/diploma course in the year 2018, they secured the Provisional Degree Certificates from the Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences (RGUHS).
They moved the court assailing the Notification issued by the Director of Medical Education whereby, amongst others, they were asked to “mandatorily attend Counselling” for the purpose of deploying their services to the Government for the benefit of public at large.
At that time, on the matter whether All India Quota candidates are exempted from bond obligation, the single bench had held,
“The contention of the petitioners that some of them who have availed seats under the All India Quota cannot be compelled to undergo counselling, despite the undertaking given by them on the stamped Bond, is misconceived. The provisions of Rule 15 of 2006 Rules do not exempt them from the obligation. They may constitute a separate class for some other purpose but not for the compulsive counselling. Having taken the seat after furnishing the undertaking, it not open to the obligates to turn around and to try for a repudiation or a repudiation of their liability/obligation, at this length of time. An argument to the contrary could offend the texture and architecture of the said rule. This apart, the classification of the candidates as those falling under All India Quota and others who do not so fall, would be plainly discriminatory, there being no intelligible differentia on which such classification is arguably founded, when Undertaking has been given the said candidates on par with others categories.”
In response to this verdict by Justice Krishna S Dixit, Dr Varun with others moved the division bench, which has now upheld the single bench’s order.
TNIE reports that while upholding the order, the division bench said that the appellants have tendered undertaking and bound themselves for government service.
“Once the bond is furnished, it amounts to voluntary agreeing to do government service. Hence, no ground is made out to interfere in the single judge’s order.”