Nagpur Bench Reviews PIL Citing 36.7% Unfilled Posts
In Nagpur, the Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court has sought a detailed explanation from the Central government over significant faculty vacancies at All India Institute of Medical Sciences Nagpur. The court’s intervention follows multiple unsuccessful recruitment drives that failed to bridge the shortfall.
The matter was heard by a division bench comprising Justice Anil Kilor and Justice Raj Wakode. The proceedings stem from a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) registered after a January 2, 2026 media report highlighted widespread faculty shortages across various AIIMS institutions nationwide.
Earlier, the bench had taken suo motu cognisance based on information obtained through an RTI application. The data revealed that nearly 40% of sanctioned faculty posts remain vacant across 11 AIIMS institutions, raising concerns about the impact on healthcare services and medical education.
Specifically, at AIIMS Nagpur, approximately 36.7% of sanctioned faculty posts are vacant, with 137 out of 373 positions unfilled. The court observed that such shortages could adversely affect patient care, especially amid increasing patient load at premier public hospitals.
To assist the court, senior counsel Jugal Kishore Gilda was appointed as amicus curiae, supported by advocate Shaunak Kothekar. The amicus informed the bench that recruitment efforts at AIIMS Nagpur have been ongoing for nearly one-and-a-half years.
According to submissions made before the court, five separate recruitment attempts were initiated to fill the vacant posts. Despite these efforts, a substantial number of positions remain unoccupied. The amicus also highlighted broader administrative and operational challenges affecting the institution.
Representing the Central government, counsel Mugdha Chandurkar submitted that, compared to some other AIIMS institutions, the vacancy situation at Nagpur was relatively less severe and that several posts had already been filled.
The bench has directed that all relevant issues be formally placed on record. It has asked the amicus curiae to file a comprehensive written note within two weeks and granted the Centre three additional weeks thereafter to submit its response. The case is scheduled for further hearing after three weeks.
