1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION No. 4947/2007 (Citizen Forum Mah. Nagpur Vs. The State of Mah. & ors.) Appeal District : Application No. of 200 Writ petition Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's orders. Mr. A.S. Kilor, Adv. for the petitioner. Mr. A.D. Sonak, A.G.P., R- 1 to 3. Mr. Uday Dastane, Adv. for R- 4. CORAM :D.D. SINHA & SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, JJ. DATED : FEBRUARY 27, 2008. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The counsel for the petitioner states that in the present writ petition, the petitioner is canvassing difficulties faced by the patients in various Government Hospitals, when the Doctors go on strike. It is submitted that similar grievance was raised by the present petitioner on earlier occasion by filing Writ Petition No. 214 of 2006, and this Court was informed that whenever Doctors in Government Medical Colleges and Hospitals go on strike, an action under the relevant rules i.e. Rule 10.3.8 of Residency Scheme 2 Rules was not initiated against them and, therefore, necessary directions were sought in the earlier writ petition against the respondents-Competent Authorities to take action according to law in respect of those Doctors who went on strike. The counsel for the petitioner brought to the notice of this Court the statement of the then Government Pleader who appeared for the State in the earlier writ petition, made before this Court, which reads thus: “ Shri Choudhari, learned Government Pleader also specifically stated that similar notices are already issued to the resident Doctors of Government Medical Colleges located in different part of the State of Maharashtra and they are also asked to resume duties within stipulated period. It is further stated that if the resident Doctors failed to resume duties after receipt of the notices, within stipulated period then action as provided under Rule 10.3.8 shall be taken against those resident Doctors of Government Medical Colleges, located not only in Nagpur but in other parts of the State.” 3 It is further contended that the said statement is also recored in the order dated 7th March, 2006 passed by the Division Bench of this Court by which Writ Petition No. 214/2006 came to be disposed of. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that in spite of the above referred statement made by the then Government Pleader, when the Doctors went on strike in the months of April, 2007 and October, 2007, the Competent Authority- Dean, Medical College failed to take any action against these Doctors, under the said Rules and, therefore, the interest of the patient is vitally and adversely affected, a tendency amongst the Doctors to go on strike for no justifiable reason is also growing and, therefore, the petitioner has again approached this Court for necessary directions. Mr. Sonak, the learned A.G.P., does not dispute the factual aspect of the matter, so far as Writ Petition No. 214/ 2006 is concerned, including the statement made by the then Government Pleader before this 4 Court. The learned A.G.P. assures the Court that in future, if the Doctors in the Government Medical Colleges/Hospitals go on strike, an action against such Doctors under Rule 10.3.8 shall be taken. It is, no doubt, true that if the Doctors in the Government Medical Colleges/Hospitals go on strike, it would definitely cause lot of hardship and inconvenience not only to the patients, but the family members of the patients. Similarly, this would also create lot of problems if there is an emergency and the Medical Colleges/Hospitals fail to provide an alternate arrangement. Since a statement in this regard was already made before this Court at the time of hearing of Writ Petition No. 214/2006 by the then Government Pleader and similar statement is also made by the learned A.G.P. in the present petition that in future, if these Doctors go on strike, action according to law, particularly keeping in view Rule 10.3.8, shall be initiated against them, there is no reason for us to anticipate 5 that the Dean of the respective Colleges will not take action under the said Rule, if the contingency arises. In that view of the matter, with the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE RMP