CWP No.2201 of 2010.doc - 1 – HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.2201 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 10.03.2010 **** Dr. Kranti Garg . . . . Petitioner VS. State of Punjab and others . . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Mr. Ashok Kumar Nabhewala, Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Charu Tuli, Sr. DAG, Punjab ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). This order shall dispose of CWPs No.2201 & 2859 of 2010 as common issues are involved for adjudication. For brevity, the facts are being extracted from CWP No.2201 of 2010. (2). The petitioner seeks a mandamus to direct the respondents to permit her to join the post of Medical Officer in Punjab Civil Medical Services pursuant to the appointment letter dated 01st December, 2009, after completion of the Postgraduate Degree in Chest and TB hospital and till then her appointment be not cancelled. CWP No.2201 of 2010.doc - 2 – (3). The petitioner obtained her MBBS degree in December, 2005 and completed the internship in December 2006. Pursuant to the recommendations made by Punjab Public Service Commission, she has been selected to PCMS for appointment as Medical Officer vide appointment letter dated 1st December, 2009 received by her on 8th December, 2009. As per the terms and conditions of the appointment, the petitioner was required to join her duties within 10 days after the medical examination etc. (4). Before her selection to PCMS, the petitioner appeared in the Postgraduate entrance test held in April 2007 against 40% seats meant for the open category and on the basis of her overall merit, she got admission in Chest & TB Degree Course which she is still pursuing and shall complete by the end of the year 2010. (5). The petitioner represented to the respondents to extend her joining time and also to permit her to join as Medical Officer on completion of the Postgraduate course. As her request has not been acceded to, that the petitioner has approached this Court. CWP No.2201 of 2010.doc - 3 – (6). Upon notice, the respondents have opposed the prayer made by the petitioner and have relied upon the stand already taken by them in a batch of writ petitions including CWP No.12839 of 2009 (Dr. Sohrab Arora and others vs. State of Punjab and others) which has already been disposed of by this Court vide order dated March 10, 2010 the operative part of which reads as follows:- “Having heard learned counsel for the parties and following the view taken by this Court in the cited decision, it is apparent that no direction to the respondents to keep the posts unfilled for the petitioners till they complete their Post Graduate Diploma/Degree Courses, can be issued. However, owing to the fact that even according to the respondents, the posts of Medical Officers are lying vacant at large scale, the respondent-authorities shall be at liberty to permit the petitioners to join against the other unfilled posts after completion of their PG Diploma/degree courses, provided that the petitioners apply in writing within a period of one month from the date(s) of completion of their Post Graduate Diploma/Degree. Suffice it to observe that such an application shall be considered by the respondents sympathetically and keeping the fact in view that additional appointments would also serve the larger public interest. Needless to say that in case the petitioners’ request for appointments are accepted by the State Government, their bond period shall start operating from the dates of their appointments only. The respondents, however, are now at liberty to offer appointment to the candidates next in order of merit.” CWP No.2201 of 2010.doc - 4 – (7). However, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, who has got admission in the Postgraduate course and is already a Junior Resident in the Medical College, is entitled to be issued ‘No Objection Certificate’ to pursue her higher qualification at par with the other in-service candidates. He further urges that the petitioner cannot be asked to execute service bonds as per the terms and conditions of the appointment letter as she has yet not ‘joined’ the PCMS. In other words, the contention appears to be that since the petitioner has already got admission in the Postgraduate Course before her appointment in PCMS, the condition of five years’ service required to be completed by an in-service candidate to pursue the higher studies cannot be applied to her and at the best she can be treated to be on ‘extraordinary leave’. (8). Reliance is also placed upon a Division Bench decision of this Court in Parveen Akhtar v. State of Punjab and others, 2007 (3) SCT 839. (9). I have given my thoughtful consideration to the contentions noticed above and perused the records. (10). In my considered view, in the light of the two Division Bench decisions of this Court rendered in CWP No.2201 of 2010.doc - 5 – Neeraja Puri Talwar vs. State of Punjab, 1993 (3) SCT 66 and Dr. Maninder Kaur vs. State of Punjab and others (CWP No.15839 of 1996), the directions as prayed for by the petitioner cannot be issued especially, when the series of Medical Officers are required urgently in the larger public interest. However, nothing precludes the respondents from considering the petitioner’s claim sympathetically and extend her joining period as it would enable the respondents to fill up the large scale vacancies and that too with specialized and better qualified doctors like the petitioner who are near completion of their Postgraduate Degree within a short span of time. (11). The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of in terms of the order dated March 10, 2010 passed in Dr. Sohrab Arora’s case (supra). (12). Ordered accordingly. (13). Dasti . (SURYA KANT) JUDGE 10.03.2010 vishal shonkar