Fleeing from India after MBBS studies without rendering service is deprecated: HC
Ahmedabad: Detesting the practice adopted by few medical students who chooses not to serve in the rural areas after completion of the studies and move abroad instead, the Gujarat High Court on Monday noted that "fleeing abroad without rendering any service to this country is deprecated."
This comes while the High Court was considering a petition by an MBBS graduate from GMERS (2015 batch), who sought direction upon the Government for giving back his original documents that were withheld by the government for failing to comply with the bond service terms.
Even though the High Court bench comprising of Justice Karia directed the Government to return the documents, it also noted as reported by TOI, "It was a pious duty on part of the student to render service to the government, to pay back the obligation he has undertaken by paying back to the society or to pay the money for not rendering his services in order to pursue his education abroad. By taking advantage of education facility available in the country and then fleeing abroad without rendering any service to this country is deprecated."
Medical Dialogues had recently reported that the MBBS graduate from GMERS college had sought legal help as the Government withheld documents saying that he should either pay Rs 2 lakh towards bond or serve in the rural areas for two years. The father of the student had argued before the court that if the documents were not released the student wouldn't be able to survive abroad because he would not be able to get employed.
The student, from the time of his admission was against executing the bond and even completed his medical education without executing the bond.
Responding to the plea, the HC bench had questioned the Government under which rule it had withheld the documents of a student and mentioned, "This is nothing but barbarism." At this outset the counsel for the Government tried to defend the stand of the State saying that the execution of the bond got delayed as the Government had taken a sympathetic approach.
However, the Court clarified that the Government cannot ruin a person's career by withholding the documents, if they were sympathetic at the first place. The bench also criticized the Government for showing sympathy to those who are not worthy and run away after studies instead of serving in the rural areas.
The Times of India recently reported that the Gujarat High Court directed the State Government to return the original documents to the student as it observed that none of the rules empowered the government for withholding the original. In fact, the Court pointed out that the rules make it clear that the government needs to return the documents at the earliest after the admission process is completed.
"You cannot retain original documents for any fault committed by the student," observed the High Court bench.
When the counsel appearing for the State contended that returning the documents would set a bad example, the Court noted, "This will rather set a correct example for all institutes, that they cannot withhold students' documents."
Responding to the strict posture of the High Court, the Government informed that the district collector would be instructed to initiate proceedings against the student to recover the bond amount.
The Court then clarified that the authorities could do anything that would be permitted under the law, but it didn't have the rights to withhold the documents of a student. Besides, the Court also noted that the Government cannot ruin a student's career when it was at fault for executing the bond in the beginning of the admission process.
However, the Court was also against interfering on the Government's decision over the bond and the bench clarified that the government was entitled to recover Rs 2 lakh for the bond.
As the Government insisted on recovering the amount, the father of the student was quoted saying, "Asking for money for provisional certificate amounts to extortion on the part of the government."
At this outset, citing a Supreme Court order, the High Court bench clarified that rendering services to the Government after the completion of the MBBS course was not unreasonable. In fact, the petitioner's contention that the student had studied from a private medical college was not a ground for escaping rural service, the court opined.
The Court further denied believing the fact that the student was unaware of the bond condition even after he had studied for five years.
"It was a pious duty on part of the student to render service to the government, to pay back the obligation he has undertaken by paying back to the society or to pay the money for not rendering his services in order to pursue his education abroad. By taking advantage of education facility available in the country and then fleeing abroad without rendering any service to this country is deprecated," the bench was quoted saying by TOI.