Dr. Raghvendra Singh vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against communication dated 20.09.2019, whereby, petitioner has been called upon to deposit amount of bond of Rs. 5 lakh and a direction to the respondents to release the original documents/certificates of the petitioner and be relieved to join on the post of Medical Officer.

It is, inter alia, indicated in the writ petition that the petitioner, who was working as Medical Officer, after participating in offline counselling dated 23-25.04.2019 was allotted MS (Anatomy) in RNT Medical College, Udaipur.

As per the requirements the petitioner produced surety bond dated 31.05.2019, inter alia, against non-joining the course, leaving the course before completion and termination on account of unsatisfactory performance/misconduct/indiscipline for a sum of Rs. 3.50 lakh and bank guarantee of Rs. 1.50 lakh alongwith refund of stipend received by the petitioner.

On 01.08.2019 and 20.08.2019 the petitioner submitted an application for leaving the P.G. Course. However, the petitioner was not relieved and, therefore, the petitioner again submitted application dated 11.09.2019, wherein, by communication dated 20.09.2019 the petitioner was informed that only on deposit of a sum of Rs. 5 lakh, action would be taken on the application filed by the petitioner for leaving the P.G. Course.

Feeling aggrieved, the present writ petition has been filed.

It is, inter alia, submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondents are not justified in demanding the amount of surety of Rs. 5 lakh from the petitioner, inasmuch as, this Court in the case of Dr. Prafull Mehta v. State of Rajasthan & Anr. : 2014 (2) RLW 1039 (Raj.) has laid down that the amount is not recoverable.

Further submissions have been made that the State Government vide order dated 14.03.2019 (Annexure-4) had waived off the production of bond, inter alia, in P.G. Course pertaining to Anatomy, which order was modified on 18.03.2019 (Annexure-5) correcting the typographical error and making the same effective for Session 2019-20 and, therefore, the action of the respondents in demanding the amount of surety bond deserves to be quashed and set aside and the respondents be directed to relieve the petitioner.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that reliance placed on judgment in the case of Dr. Prafull Mehta (supra) is not justified, inasmuch as, the petitioner therein had paid amount of surety bond of Rs. 5 lakh and had only questioned the demand of refund of stipend, which demand was quashed by the Court.

In relation to the order dated 14.03.2019 it was submitted that the order has been passed by the respondents with reference to the orders dated 24.02.2015 and 07.08.2015, which pertain to the submission of bond for commitment to serve the State Government for five years and the amount of bond was Rs. 15 lakh and that the said order does not pertain to the surety bond of Rs. 5 lakh, which is rightly being demanded from the petitioner and, therefore, the petition deserves to be dismissed.

I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record.

In so far as the judgment in the case of Dr. Prafull Mehta (supra) is concerned, a bare reading of para 3 clearly indicates that the petitioner therein had paid the amount of surety bond amounting to Rs. 5 lakh and had confined his challenge to the refund of amount of stipend.

This Court after thoroughly dealing with the issue raised, ordered as under:-

"25. In view of the above discussions, this writ petition is allowed and it is held that the condition of paying the stipend back, in case a student leaves P.G. Course before its completion, is declared as void and is hereby quashed and set aside. The respondents are restrained from recovering the amount of stipend paid to the petitioner during post graduation course."

The above operative portion clearly indicates that the judgment deals with refund of amount of stipend only and, therefore, the said judgment has no application to the facts of the present case as the respondents have not demanded the refund of amount of stipend from the petitioner.

In so far as the reliance placed on the order dated 14.03.2019 (Annexure-4) issued by the respondents is concerned, the relevant part of the order reads as under:-

"विषयः- पी.जी./सुपर स्पेशिलियटी कोर्स शैक्षणिक सत्र 2019-20 के संबधित विषयों में बॉण्ड खारिज किये जाने बाबत ।

संदर्भः- चिकित्सा शिक्षा विभाग के पत्र क्रमांक प. 7(86)/CM/HM/Budget/डीएमई/एके./2015 दिनांक 24.2.2015 एवं 3159 दिनांक 7.8.2015 के क्रम में ।

उपरोक्त विषयान्तर्गत एवं संदर्भित पत्रों के क्रम में शैक्षणिक सत्र 2018-19 में निम्नलिखित पी.जी./सुपर स्पेशिलियटी कोर्स के संबधित विषयों में बॉण्ड खारिज (waived off) किये जाने की अनुशंषा प्रदान की जाती हैः-

पी.जी. कोर्स

सुपर स्पेशिलियटी कोर्स

एनाटोमी

सी.टी. सर्जरी

बायोकैमस्ट्री

पीडियाट्रिक सर्जरी

फार्माकोलोजी

पी.एस.एम

फिजीयोलोजी

6.फोरन्सिक मेडिसिन

-sd-

(राज नारायण शर्मा)

अति.निदेशक (प्रशा.)एवं

पदेन उप शासन सचिव"

The typographical error in the order dated 14.03.2019 was corrected by order dated 18.03.2019 (Annexure-5) by changing the session from 2018-19 to 2019-20.

A bare look at the above quoted order, ordering for waving off the requirement of bond, inter alia, in Anatomy is in relation to the orders dated 24.02.2015 and 07.08.2015 issued by the Medical Department.

Learned counsel for the respondents has placed for perusal of the Court both the orders. The relevant part of both the orders reads as under:-

Dated 24.02.2015

"Sub: Bond for PG Courses in Government Medical Colleges of the State for All India and State quota for Medical courses.

With reference to the above cited subject it has been decided by the State Government that the students selected for the PG Course in medical and dental fraternity will have to fill a bond of commitment to serve the State Government for 5 years amounting to Rs. 15 lac. The prescribed Performa of bond is enclosed herewith for your perusal and necessary execution with effect from 2015 and              onwards.

Encl: As above

-sd-

(Dr. S.P. Singh)

Joint Secretary to the Government"

Dated 07.08.2015

"Sub: Bond for DM-MCH Courses in Government Medical Colleges of the State for All India and State Quota for Medical Courses.

With reference to the above cited subject it has been decided by the State Government that the students selected for the DM-MCH course in medical fraternity will have to fill a bond of commitment to serve the State Government for 5 years amounting to Rs. 15 lac. The prescribed Performa of bond is enclosed herewith for your perusal and necessary execution with effect from 2015 and onwards.

Encl:- As above

-sd-

Joint Secretary to the Government"

A perusal of the communication dated 24.02.2015 indicates that the same pertains to the decision of the State Government that the students selected for P.G. Course in medical and dental fraternity will have to fill up the bond of commitment to serve the State Government for five years amounting to Rs. 15 lakh. The communication dated 07.08.2015 pertains to the decision of the State Government that the students selected for DM-MCH course in medical fraternity will have to fill a bond of commitment to serve the State Government for five years amounting to Rs. 15 lakh. As such, it is apparent that in so far as the order dated 14.03.2019 (Annexure-4) is concerned, the same pertains to filling of the bond of commitment to serve the State Government for five years amounting to Rs. 15 lakh and the same has nothing to do with the requirement of submitting surety bond amounting to Rs. 5 lakh and, therefore, the plea based on the order dated 14.03.2019 raised by the petitioner also cannot be accepted.

As apparently the petitioner has submitted a surety bond amounting to Rs. 5 lakh except for the refund of the amount of stipend, which condition has already been quashed by this Court, the petitioner on account of leaving the PG Course before its completion is liable to make payment and, therefore, the action of the respondents in issuing the communication dated 20.09.2019 (Annexure-8) cannot be faulted in any manner.

Consequently, there is no substance in the writ petition, the same is, therefore, dismissed.