Denying NOC to in-service doctors for sponsored DNB admissions is arbitrary, unreasonable: HC
Orissa High Court
Cuttack: In a recent judgment, the Orissa High Court slammed a clause in the 2022 policy of the Odisha Government, which barred in-service medical officers from obtaining a No Objection Certificate (NOC) for admission to Sponsored DNB courses.
Granting relief to an in-service doctor, Dr. Jamadar, who was refused the NOC solely based on the nature of admission, the HC bench comprising Justices Manash Ranjan Pathak and Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo observed,
"...the decision of State not to grant NOC fails, being manifestly arbitrary, unreasonable, being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution."
"State after formulating a policy to grant NOC to doctors willing to do Postgraduation has discriminated the doctors working in OMHS cadre who are applying for DNB and the doctors who want to prosecute their post graduate degree by opting for sponsored DNB. No intelligible differentia has been shown for manifest differential treatment of doctors in one service cadre on the basis of they opting for the DNB in sponsored category," observed the HC bench.
The matter concerned an in-service medical officer of the Odisha Medical and Health Services (OMHS) cadre. He qualified NEET-PG 2024 with an All India Rank of 87,721 and had applied for participation in NBEMS Centralized Counselling for Sponsored DNB seats. As per the eligibility criteria of NBEMS, mentioned in the notification dated 10.12.2025, government doctors in regular service are allowed to apply for sponsored seats.
Even though he was eligible, the doctor was denied an NOC by the State Health Department to participate in the NBEMS Centralized Counselling 2025 for admission to Sponsored DNB (Post MBBS) courses through a letter dated 20.01.2025.
The State refused to grant the NOC under Clause 5 of a departmental policy dated 02.09.2022, which mentioned as follows:
"NOC will not be issued to the Medical Officers of OMHS cadre for the sponsored DNB course."
Challenging this, the petitioner approached the HC bench and argued that other similarly situated OMHS officers were granted NOC for Non-Sponsored DNB and MD/MS courses, and therefore, this classification was irrational and unconstitutional.
While considering the matter, the HC bench observed that such an exclusion had no basis in statutory service rules, nor did it find support in any intelligible classification, and it clearly violated Article 14, which guarantees equality before the law.
Observing that there was no rational basis for treating Sponsored DNB and Non-Sponsored DNB admissions differently, the HC bench observed, "Having heard the learned ASC and having gone through the reasons stated in the above paragraphs in the counter our conclusion upon judicial review is that no sufficient grounds have been stated, reasons disclosed in the counter to indicate that there is any intelligible differentia between the doctors in the OMHS cadre who opt to study DNBE (Post MBBS) in sponsored category and the doctors who opt to study the DNBE (Post MBBS) not in the sponsored category."
The court also observed, "We have also considered the aspect that the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences, the National Medical Commission (NMC) do not make any such distinction between the DNB and DNB sponsored as sought to be argued by the opposite parties. The broad proposition of the law is that there can not be discrimination at the hands of employer of a group of employees without there being any intelligible differentia."
The bench also held that the State cannot differentiate its employees who wish to take PG study by distinguishing PG study in medical science to be prosecuted in premier hospitals may be in the private sector those are imparting Post Graduate Degree in Medical Sciences such as DNBE at Government hospitals and Post Graduate in Medical Sciences imparted at Government Hospitals. "No such distinction can be made as far as the degree DNB (Post MBBS) is concerned," it observed.
The Court also rejected the State's argument that granting NOCs for sponsored DNBs could increase stress on peripheral healthcare due to vacancies and administrative difficulties in paying salaries.
It held, "It has been settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Commissioner of Police, Bombay v. Gordhandas Bhanji : AIR 1952 SC 16 and also reiterated in Mohinder Singh Gill v. The Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi: AIR 1978 SC 851 that the decision of the authority must disclose the reasons itself at the first instance."
Accordingly, the Court directed the authorities to grant NOC to the petitioner and ordered, "In view of the discussions above, we allow the writ application directing the authorities to grant ‘No Objection Certificate’ to the petitioner-doctor working in the OMHS cadre to participate in the Centralized Merit Based Counseling for admission to Sponsored DNB (Post MBBS and Post Diploma) seats – 2025 admission session by 02.01.2026 so as to enable the petitioner to participate in the counseling before the last date, 8th January, 2026 as notified by the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences, New Delhi by notice dated 10.12.2025."
To view the order, click on the link below:
https://medicaldialogues.in/pdf_upload/orissa-hc-sponsored-dnb-noc-319088.pdf
Also Read: Odisha HC junks plea seeking reservation in Super speciality assistant professor posts
