Karnataka HC grants Temporary Relief to 335 Doctors From Bond Service order
Karnataka High Court
Bengaluru: Granting temporary relief to 335 PG medical graduates the Karnataka High Court has stayed the implementation of a recent government notification issued in July, through which these doctors were asked to register for online counselling to undergo one-year compulsory government service.
However, the Court clarified that this interim order would be applicable only to the petitioners who approached the High Court bench.
The Karnataka HC bench of Justice S.R. Krishna passed this interim order while considering a plea by the doctors who joined PG medical courses under private/management/NRI quota seats during 2020-2021 or earlier.
After completing their course back in August 2023, these doctors started practising. They completed their courses before the Karnataka Compulsory Service by Candidates Completed Medical Courses (Amendment) Act, 2023 came into force on November 8, 2023.
Approaching the HC bench, the petitioner doctors questioned the legality of the notification issued on July 17, 2024, issued by the Commissioner of Health and Family Welfare.
As per the latest media report by The Hindu, the petitioner doctors argued that after they completed their course, they were arm-twisted by the authorities to release their credentials to allow them to pursue further studies or begin work.
They also contended that the notification, issued under the Karnataka Compulsory Service by Candidates Completed Medical Courses (Amendment) Act, 2023, which came into force on January 29, 2024, would not be applicable to them as they completed their PG courses before the amendment was introduced.
The petitioners argued that the 2023 Amendment was prospective in nature adding that the notification asking them to register for the counselling came as a shock to them as many of them were working and had obligation to serve their employers for specified periods, TOI has reported.
Apart from this, the plea highlighted that many of the petitioners were discharging familial responsibilities and were on course to parenthood. Therefore, they argued that they were entitled to relief and discharge from compulsory service obligations as the Compulsory Services Act as amended in 2017 and 2023, contradicted the Act's objectives and was discriminatory and disruptive of their right to pursue their professional careers.
Further, the petitioners alleged that in the 2023 amendment, the government made several changes to the provisions in the original Act of 2012 and granted exemption to certain categories of doctors, and made compulsory service applicable for only existing vacancies specified by the government.
Under the 2012 Act, doctors undergoing compulsory service were offered almost equal salary to the minimum gross salary of a general duty doctor in the Health Department. However, the petitioners pointed out that the 2023 amendment has substituted with the words "salary to be specified by the government".
