's/ ?^1? ..--•\^ ^-"^y'' -AO<,!<-^^'1^-" ^••"^^y" ^•"^ ?<6C",e ^ / UiTHE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) No. LJ ^ \ /2011 4./ 1. Dr. Mahaveer Prasad Agarwal, S/o Shri Mamchand Agarwal, Aged about 28 years, R/o Main Road, Saraipali, Mahasamund, District- Mahasamund (CG) /' 2. Dr. Rahul Kumar Goyal, S/o Ghanshyam Das Goyal, Aged about 28 years, R/o Ambikapur, District - Ambikapur (CG) 3. f Dr. Rajnesh Kumar Chakravarti, S/oShri J.P. Chakravarti, Aged about 29 years, R/o Medical College Hostel, Raipur, District - Raipur (CG) Dr. Rajesh Ban Goswami, S/o Deyal Ban Goswami, Aged about 29 years, R/o Medical College Hostel, Raipur, District - Raipur (CG) Versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department of Medical Education, DKS Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (CG) 2. State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department of Health Services, ^DKS Bhawan, Mantraiaya, Raipur (CG) Director Medical Education, Directorate of Medical Education, Raipur(CG) Petitioners > 6^ 4. Director of Health Services, Directorate of Medical Education, Raipur (CG) 5. Pt. Jawahar Lal Nehru Memorial Medical College, Raipur, District - Raipur (CG) Respondents WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA L HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT_PETmON (C1NOA671_OF^011 PETITIONERS RESPONDENTS Dr. Mahaveer Prasad Agarwal & Others Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition underArticle 226 ofthe Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri K. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri V.V.S. Murthy, Dy. Adv. General for the State. ORDER(ORAL) (Passed on this 16th day ofAugust, 2011) 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners appeared in the Pre Medical Test (PMT). After selection they were given admission in M.B.B.S. course in the respondent College. The petitioners No.1 and 2 were directed to furnish bank guarantee of Rs.75,000/- each for the period from 13.04.2006 to 10.04.2009 & 13.04.2006 to 12.04.2009 and the petitioners No.3 and 4 were directed to furnish a bank guarantee of Rs.40,000/- each for the period from 13.04.2006 to 10.04.2009 & 15.04.2006 to 15.04.2009 for the reason that after obtaining the M.B.B.S. degree they will serve in the rural areas of the State of Chhattisgarh. Accordingly, each of the petitioners furnished the bank guarantee. The petitioners completed their M.B.B.S. and also completed their internship. 3. Shri Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that even after making various requests, the respondents have not refunded the amount of bank guarantee to the petitioners. He further submits that the facts of the instant petition is squarely covered by the order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 2731 of - 2007 (Satish Kumar Wasnik & Others v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others) on 04.09.2009 and the instant petition may be disposed of in the same terms. 4. Shri Sharma next submits that the pre-condition to deposit a bank guarantee was to give an employment to the petitioners, immediately after completion of the MBBS course. The petitioners NN^ have been making apptications and representations to appoint them in rural areas. However, noappointment was made and the State Government did not release the bank guarantee of the amount as stated above. Thus, the petitioners have suffered loss on account of the conduct of the State Government and, as such, they are entitled to refund of the amount as well as interest on the amount of bank guarantee, as the sane was unnecessarily retained by the respondent authorities. 5. Shri Murthy, learned Dy. Adv. General appearing for the State submits that similar order, as has been passed in Satish Kumar Wasnik (supra), may be passed, however, liberty may be reserved to the respondents/State to verify the facts asto whether they are similar to that ofthe present petition. 6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is evident that instead of bond, the petitioners were directed to deposit bank guarantee of Rs.75,000/-, Rs.75,000/-, Rs.40,000/- & Rs.40,000/-, respectively before final examination of MBBS course. The said bank guarantees ha.ve been encashed. The petitioners were required to serve in the rural areas, but due to the laches and default on the part of the respondent authorities, the petitioners could not be sent for serving in rural areas. 7. In view of the above, the respondents are directed to refund Rs. 75,0007- each to the petitioner Nos.1 & 2, and Rs.40,000/- each to the petitioner Nos.3 & 4, with interest at the rate of 6% per annum, subject to verification of the facts. 8. In view of the foregoing, the petition stands disposed of. No order asto costs. Gowri Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge