Stipend Disparity at Maha Medical Colleges- Govt to File Response in HC

Nagpur: The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court asked the Maharashtra Government to respond to a plea alleging stipend disparity among medical interns from private unaided medical colleges and those studying in government medical colleges.

In response, the counsel for the State Government has assured the High Court to file its response by April 25, 2025, when the matter has been listed for further hearing.

The plea before the High Court has been filed by those who could not get admitted to government medical colleges even though they had met the eligibility criteria. Due to the implementation of the Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC) quota, these students had to be enrolled in private medical colleges.

Medical Dialogues had last year reported that demanding parity in stipend for the MBBS interns in private and government medical colleges, a group of medical graduates from a city-based private medical college had filed a plea before the Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court.

Also Read: MBBS Graduates from Private medical college move Bombay HC Seeking Stipend Parity During Internship, notice issued to NMC, state

In their plea, the medicos, who pursued their medical education from NKP Salve Institute of Medical Sciences (NKPIMS), had pointed out that while the medicos at the Government Medical Colleges and Hospitals (GMCH) and government-aided colleges receive Rs 18,000 per month as stipend, they only received only Rs 4,000 per month.

Approaching the High Court bench, they had prayed for the implementation of a Government Resolution dated 27.02.2024, which was issued by the State Medical Education and Drugs Department. As per the petitioners, implementing the G.R would address the issue of disparity between the stipends paid to the MBBS interns at the private and government medical institutes. The petitioners, therefore, sought uniformity in stipends across medical dental, Ayurveda, unani, and homeopathy colleges, in line with the government directives.

During a previous hearing, the counsel for the NKP Salve Institute of Medical Sciences had submitted before the Court that the petitioners had been granted admission in the SEBC category, whose fees were being paid by the State, and it also included the amount of stipend paid to them.

The college's counsel argued that all these students would have originally secured admission to the GMCs. However, due to the SEBC reservation, in order to accommodate candidates belonging to the said category of reservation GMCs, the petitioners were shifted to the private medical colleges. Because of the shifting, the fees of the students, even though they belonged to the Open Category, are being paid by the State, on the account of adjustment of the reservation candidates, submitted the college's counsel.

It was argued by the college's counsel that since the fees of these students including stipend are borne by them, bringing the stipend on par with the Government institutes would only result in the students themselves contributing for the enhanced stipend.

Recently, after observing that the petitioners were enrolled from the SEBC quota, the HC bench had asked the State Counsel to take instructions to clarify whether the State was willing to pay stipend on par with what the students enrolled in the Government institutes were getting, as originally the students were entitled to get enrolled in the Government Medical Colleges.

During the hearing of the case on 09.04.2025, the HC bench comprising Justices Avinash G. Gharote and Abhay J. Mantri listed the matter for further hearing on 25.04.2025 after recording the State's assurance to file a reply.

"List the matter on 25/04/2025, by which time, the learned AGP for the respondents-State assures to file reply," ordered the Court.

To view the order, click on the link below:

https://medicaldialogues.in/pdf_upload/bombay-hc-nagpur-bench-282473.pdf

Also Read: Stipend parity for private medical students originally entitled to Govt medical college admissions- Bombay HC seeks state's response