Autonomous Medical PG Admission Rules | In-Service Doctors Need Not Submit Bond For Rural Posting: MP High Court
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has clarified that In-Service Doctors are not required to undertake the bond for rural posting under Rule 11 of the MP Autonomous Medical and Dental Post Graduate Course (Degree/ Diploma) Admission Rules, 2017 (Rules of 21). The petitioner contended that since her appointment order for rural posting was not issued within three months from the date of declaration...
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has clarified that In-Service Doctors are not required to undertake the bond for rural posting under Rule 11 of the MP Autonomous Medical and Dental Post Graduate Course (Degree/ Diploma) Admission Rules, 2017 (Rules of 21).
The petitioner contended that since her appointment order for rural posting was not issued within three months from the date of declaration of the PG course result she should be relieved from the bond conditions.
The division bench of Justice Vivek Rusia and Justice Pradeep Mittal observed;
"So far, the applicability of Rule 11 of Madhya Pradesh Autonomous Medical and Dental Post Graduate Course (Degree/ Diploma) Admission Rules, 2017 is concerned, this provision applies to selected candidates except in service as demonstrator or Medical Officers. Therefore, by virtue of the appointment of the petitioner in the Department of Health Services, she is not required to undergo a rural posting. She took admission in a PG course/diploma course while working as a Medical Officer. After completion of the course, she was required to rejoin her duties. Therefore, in service, candidates are not required to submit a bond for rural posting".
The petitioner Dr Deepali Bairwa filed a petition seeking release from the bond condition from the Bhopal Director of Medical Education, along with the release of her original documents.
The petitioner completed her Post-Graduate Diploma in Anaesthesia in March 2017. A formal certificate was issued by MP Medical Science University, Jalpur. She registered with the Medical Council in July 2017.
The counsel for the petitioner contended that since the appointment for rural posting was not issued within 3 months from the date of declaration of PG diploma result, she should be released from the bond conditions. Under Rule 11 of the Pre-PG Rules of 2014, since the Commissioner of Health Services did not issue an appointment order for the petition within three months from the date of her result, the bond filed by her would be deemed cancelled.
The respondents contended that the original certificates of the petitioner were released in August 2017, in compliance with the interim order passed in W.P. No.20195/2016. The petitioner was granted NOC with a clear stipulation that the same was granted for her to complete her super speciality course, and post completion, she was required to render compulsory rural service for one year.
It was further submitted that she was appointed as Medical Officer in Ratlam through an order of December 2016, and during her PG diploma course, she was already a government employee. It was also asserted that before her leave for further studies could be approved, she went on unauthorised leave to pursue her PG diploma.
The court noted that per the NOC issued by MG Medical College in Indore, the original documents of the petitioner were returned subject to an undertaking that she would complete one year of rural posting.
The court also took note that the petitioner suppressed the fact that she was appointed as a Medical Officer in Ratlam and that her unauthorized leave was treated as Dies Non.
Examining Rule 11 of the Rules of 2017, the court observed that it applied to selected candidates except 'in service'. Therefore, in the present case, since the petitioner was appointed as a Medical Officer, she was not required to undergo rural posting.
The court further observed that the petitioner was required to rejoin her duties after completion of her PG Diploma and, therefore, was not required to submit a bond for rural posting.
Observing that the petitioner lacked "clean hands" and suppressed a material fact concerning her appointment as a Medical Officer, the bench held that the petition deserved dismissal on this ground alone.
The bench directed, "The petitioner has not approached this court with clean hands as she suppressed the important facts in the writ petition; the writ petition is liable to be dismissed on these grounds alone. If the petitioner is willing to join back her duties as a Medical Officer in the Health Department, then she will have to work in Rural/remote areas under the bond condition. In view of the above, this Writ Petition is also dismissed".
Case Title: Deepali Bairwa v State [WP-17891-2022]
For Petitioner: Senior Advocate Aditya Sanghi with Advocate Vinita Ahuja
For State: Additional Advocate General Janhavi Pandit