The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has ruled that government doctors who pursue postgraduate (PG) courses without physically joining their duties are not entitled to salary or allowances for that period. The Division Bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Sanjay Parihar delivered this judgment while hearing a plea by the Union Territory of J&K and its Health & Medical Education Department.
Case Background
The matter involved two doctors appointed as Assistant Surgeons/Medical Officers in 2011. At the time of their appointment, both were already pursuing PG courses at the Government Medical College, Jammu. They never physically joined their postings as Assistant Surgeons and continued their studies, later reporting for duty only after completing their PG courses.
Tribunal Order Challenged
Since no salary was paid to them during their PG studies, the doctors approached the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Jammu, seeking payment under Article 44-A of the J&K Civil Service Regulations, 1956. In February 2025, the Tribunal directed the Government to pay them salaries, prompting the UT administration to challenge the order in the High Court.
Court’s Interpretation of Article 44-A
The HC Bench referred to its earlier judgment in Union Territory of J&K v. Javed Iqbal (2024) and clarified that Article 44-A applies only when a government servant is deputed by the employer for training courses related to their current job. It explicitly excludes higher studies or specialised training lasting more than eight weeks, which instead fall under the Leave Rules of 1979.
Doctors Held in Unauthorized Absence
The Court observed that the doctors were never deputed or permitted by the Health Department to pursue PG courses and had chosen not to join their appointments. It termed their case as one of “abandonment of service/unauthorised absence” and noted that the doctors were fortunate the Government had not initiated disciplinary proceedings against them, but instead allowed them to rejoin service after their studies.
Directions to Government
While allowing the Government’s appeal, the Court directed the administration to set up a proper mechanism to regulate such cases in future. It emphasized that employees pursuing higher studies without permission must be treated as delinquent and proceeded against under disciplinary rules. At the same time, it advised the Government to streamline permission processes for genuine cases to ensure fairness while maintaining discipline in service.
