AIIMS Obligated To Pay Stipend To Indian Junior Resident Doctors, Not Foreign PG Students: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that the All India Institute of Medical Science (AIIMS) is obligated to pay stipend payments to Indian Junior Residents and not the foreign-national postgraduate medical trainees.A division bench comprising Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar said that AIIMS must prioritise such payments to domestic students who are “beneficiaries...
The Delhi High Court has held that the All India Institute of Medical Science (AIIMS) is obligated to pay stipend payments to Indian Junior Residents and not the foreign-national postgraduate medical trainees.
A division bench comprising Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar said that AIIMS must prioritise such payments to domestic students who are “beneficiaries of Indian taxpayer funds” and expected to contribute to the national healthcare system.
“Extending such benefits to foreign/sponsored students who neither contribute to the domestic tax base nor form part of the national service pipeline would defeat the very fiscal rationale underlying their separate categorisation,” the Court said.
The Bench allowed a batch of pleas filed by AIIMS challenging a single judge order that directed the institution to pay emoluments to foreign-national postgraduate students at par with Indian Junior Residents, except those candidates who were admittedly under “sponsored” seats.
The question before the Court was whether foreign-national medical trainees admitted under the “Foreign” category form a separate and intelligibly distinct class, justifying differential emoluments treatment.
Setting aside the single judge order, the Bench held that the classification between Indian residents admitted through domestic competition and foreign nationals admitted through a special, diplomatically-governed low-competition window bears a direct and logical connection to the policy that AIIMS should not incur financial liability for trainees admitted under international cooperation arrangements.
Observing that differential treatment between both the categories of students is objectively justified and intrinsically tied to the category‟s purpose, the Court said:
“The nexus is therefore, clear, proximate and constitutionally sufficient: the State‟s aim of promoting international academic engagement while safeguarding public funds is directly advanced by maintaining a “no- financial-liability” category for foreign and sponsored candidates.”
The Bench rejected the foreign students' argument that identical clinical duties performed by them warranted identical stipend or emoluments.
It added that candidates who consciously participate in the admission process with full knowledge of the governing rules cannot be permitted to approbate and reprobate after taking advantage of the same.
It concluded that the classification “Foreign National” candidates satisfies both limbs of the Article 14 of the Constitution of India's twin test and thus, is constitutionally sustainable.
“The Impugned Judgment, in so far as, it directs payment of emoluments to non-sponsored foreign nationals at par with Indian Junior Residents, cannot be sustained,” it ordered.
Title: AIIMS v. DR. SANJAY KUMAR YADAV & ORS & other connected matters
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1570