SCA/5336/2003 1/5 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 5336 of 2003 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 9515 of 2002 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= HARISH KHUBCHANDANI & 12 - Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR GM JOSHI for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 13. MS TRUSHA PATEL, AGP for Respondent(s) : 1, RULE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 2, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL Date : 23/04/2008 SCA/5336/2003 2/5 JUDGMENT ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Both the petitioners are the students, who opted for further studies of Post Graduation in Medical Faculty. The prayers in Special Civil Application No.5336 of 2003 are to issue appropriate writ or directions to the respondent authority to pay stipend to the petitioners from the date of their joining the Post Graduation Diploma Course and to declare the action of the respondent authority for not paying stipend as illegal and violative of principles of natural justice as well as Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. In Special Civil Application No.9515 of 2002, similar prayer has been made to declare the inaction to pay stipend to the petitioner as illegal and the prayer is also made to direct the respondent to release the stipend to the petitioner after 31.5.2002 onwards. 2. It deserves to be recorded that in both the petitions, no interim relief was granted directing the respondents to pay stipend. 3. When the matter is taken up for final hearing, SCA/5336/2003 3/5 JUDGMENT the learned AGP, Ms.Patel has placed on record a copy of the Government Resolution dated 27.2.2004, taking policy decision to pay stipend to the resident doctors, who undertake studies of Post Graduation in Medical Faculty and the rates of stipend are restored as they were vide earlier Resolution dated 17.10.2002 of the State Government. 4. As such, payment of stipend to the resident doctors, who undertake Post Graduate Study is essentially a policy matter of the State Government. It is true that earlier the policy was prevailing for payment of stipend and it came to be discontinued for some time. However, it also appears that this Court in Special Civil Application No.362 of 2003 and Misc. Civil Application No.1099 of 2003 had directed the State Government to reconsider the matter for payment of stipend and based on the same, as declared by the learned AGP, the Government has passed the resolution dated 27.2.2004 and the policy to pay the stipend is restored. 5. It appears that at the relevant point of time, SCA/5336/2003 4/5 JUDGMENT when the matters were considered for admission, the issue at large was pending before this Court. The same has been culminated into the Government Resolution dated 27.2.2004 by way of restoration of the policy to pay stipend to the resident doctors. Under these circumstances, as the Government has now resolved for payment of the stipend, the larger issue can be said as having become infructuous. 6. As regard to the individual claim of the petitioners for the appropriate directions to pay stipend is concerned, as such if the policy exists, then only the petitioners can claim as of right for payment of stipend and if the policy is not in existence, unless the policy is framed or the permission is so directed, the claim of the petitioner to pay stipend cannot be sustained. In any case, the petitioners, by now, must have completed the studies and the payment of stipend is made admissible after 27.2.2004. Hence, the direction cannot be given to make the payment of stipend during the period when the policy to pay the stipend was not in SCA/5336/2003 5/5 JUDGMENT operation. 7. In above view of the matter, subject to the aforesaid observations, both the petitions have become infructuous. Disposed of accordingly. Rule discharged. No order as to costs. 23.4.2008 (Jayant Patel, J.) vinod