Madras HC denies relief to doctors, says violating Bond Conditions results in Doctor shortage
Chennai: Upholding the bond service conditions, the Madras High Court recently dismissed the petitions filed by three doctors, who challenged the proceedings of the Director of Public Health and Preventive Medicine appointing them as Assistant Surgeon based on a bond agreement under relevant rules.
The Madras HC bench of Justice S M Subramanian noted, "It is natural that the Government desires to ensure that these Doctors, who have underdone Post Graduate training at a very low cost by utilizing the poor people, to serve the poor and the needy of our great nation at large and the State of Tamil Nadu in particular. The public have the right to expect the Specialists to utilize their service during their training for the benefit of the sick, poor and the need."
"To ensure that the services of trained Post Graduate Doctors are made available to the poor and the needy patients, a bond signed by the candidates with three sureties is obtained from the candidates at the time of their admission. The candidates are a well qualified registered medical practitioner with adequate knowledge and only after carefully reading the bond and understanding it and after being fully aware of the terms and conditions of the bond have signed and they have not been forced to sign the bond," it further observed while dismissing the plea by the petitioner doctors.
Three doctors approached the HC bench filing separate petitions. They were appointed temporarily to the post of Assistant Surgeon in compliance with the bond agreement executed by them. The Court noted that there was no dispute over the fact that the petitioners secured admission for Post Graduate Medical Course by executing a bond stating that on completion of the course, they would serve in the Government Medical College and Hospital for two years. Such a bond was executed because the Government would spend considerable amount for these Post Graduate Medical students to undergo the Medical course.
However, after completing the course, the petitioners claimed that they had served during the COVID-19 pandemic period and urged to reckon the said period to calculate two years of service as per the conditions stipulated in the bond.
On the other hand, the Government Advocate opposed the plea stating that the COVID-19 pandemic is an emergency situation and the PG medical students are bound to attend patients even while undergoing the PG medical course. Referring to it as a part of their duty and highlighting that the Government is paying monthly stipend to all the PG medical students, the counsel argued that the petitioners' claim was untenable.
It was further submitted that considering the claim of many such students, the Government already reduced the period from two years to one year in G.O dated 27.10.2023. Therefore, the Government counsel argued that the petitioners have to complete one year of service in any Government Medical College and Hospital in compliance with the bond conditions.
While considering the matter, the HC bench took note of the expenditure incurred by the Government for training one PG student and the fee payable in Government Institutions. The bench opined that it was natural for the Government to want to ensure that these doctors, who pursued PG training at a very low cost, serve the poor and needy of the nation and the State of Tamil Nadu. Further, the bench observed that the candidates were well aware of the terms and conditions of the bond before executing the same.
The bench observed,
"It is believed that such an attitude of the Doctors if allowed, will encourage the attitude of not paying attention to those poor people at whose expense they have been educated, which is opposed to public interest and unacceptable. In spite of executing the bond, many of the candidates after completing their course, neither worked in Government Institutions nor paid the bond amount but in some cases, after few days of work."
"The very purpose of the Government Order is defeated by the candidates, who violate the bond conditions resulting in considerable shortage of Doctors in Government Medical Institutions across the State of Tamil Nadu, thereby depriving treatment to the poor patients, who all are taking treatment in Government Hospitals at free of cost," it further observed.
The Court further highlighted that providing decent medical treatment is an integral part under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution and the Government is duty bound to provide treatment to poor and needy people, who all are admitted in Government hospitals.
"If these Doctors after undergoing medical specialty courses, refusing to work in Government Hospital are infringing the fundamental right of the poor and needy patients, who all are undergoing treatment in Government Hospitals at free of cost. Thus, such an approach of the Doctors cannot be appreciated, since medical profession is a noble profession and the conduct of the Doctors must be in consonance with the Rules made by the Medical Council of India and the Government. Tax payers money in huge are spent for the doctors to undergo Post Graduate Medical Courses. Poor people contribute by paying tax in various forms," it observed.
The Court referred to the conditions stipulated by the National Medical Commission with reference to the training programme of Post Graduate students which mentioned that the period of COVID duty done by the Medical Officers after the completion of their PG courses alone will be treated as Bond Service and the service rendered by the Post Graduates during the PG courses can be considered as study period only.
"Even the Government is not justified in reducing the bond period from two years to one year. However, these Specialty Doctors and their services are to be utilized to the optimum level for the welfare of the patients treated at Government Hospitals," the Court observed.
Dismissing the plea, the bench further noted,
"In view of the fact that the petitioners have admittedly signed the bond and accepted the terms and conditions stipulated therein, they are not entitled to claim any concession for further reduction of period stipulated under the bond conditions. Therefore, the petitioners have to serve in Government Medical College and Hospitals as per the appointment order in compliance with the conditions and after completion of the period stipulated, appropriate decision may be taken by the respondents."
To view the order of the HC, click on the link below:
https://medicaldialogues.in/pdf_upload/madras-hc-order-237062.pdf
