HC denies extension of service for doctors who completed 3-year bond
Uttarakhand High Court
Nainital: Observing that the State no longer faces a shortage of medical professionals, the Uttarakhand High Court recently refused to issue directions to the State Government to extend the contractual service of MBBS doctors who had completed their three-year bond period.
Such an order was issued by a single bench of the High Court comprising Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari while considering a plea filed by doctors. These doctors had studied their MBBS course at government medical colleges on subsidised fees. For this, they had to submit a bond assuring to serve the State for three years.
The petitioners in this case had already completed their three-year mandatory bond period. However, they were willing to continue serving in the State and therefore sought an extension of their service contracts.
Therefore, seeking directions to the State Government to extend their contractual service, these doctors filed the plea before the High Court.
Also Read: Uttarakhand HC quashes Govt Order reducing tenure of Medical Council
As per the latest media report by Law Trend, the counsel for the State Government, represented by standing counsel Chandrashekhar Rawat, contended that the bond system was introduced at a time when the State was facing an acute shortage of doctors. However, the State counsel pointed out that currently, with regular recruitment underway and most vacant posts filled, there is no justification for continuing contractual appointments.
The Court accepted this position, noting that the bond system was designed only to meet the emergency requirements of medical staff and it could not be treated as a permanent mechanism for employment.
Accordingly, the HC bench observed, "Since regular doctors are now available in adequate numbers, the state cannot be compelled to extend the contracts of bonded doctors."
However, the court also granted limited relief to the petitioner doctors as it allowed them to submit individual representations before the Director General of Health Services if they wished to continue working on a contractual basis.
The bench has directed the DGHS to consider such representations and take decisions in accordance with law within a period of three months.
