Chandigarh: The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently upheld the Punjab Health Department’s policy requiring Punjab Civil Medical Services (PCMS) doctors to complete a minimum of one year of service before pursuing a postgraduate (PG) medical course under the non-incentive category. The bench noted that such a requirement “cannot be said to be wholly without any purpose or irrational.”
Background of the Case
The judgment was delivered while hearing a plea by a doctor challenging Clause 3.1 of the circular dated June 25, 2019, also included in the 2025 prospectus. The petitioner argued that the one-year service requirement was arbitrary, as the ultimate objective of the policy was to ensure that the department had more qualified doctors.
Petitioner’s Argument
The petitioner had joined the Punjab Government medical department after completing her MBBS and was offered a substantive appointment. After working for a month, she applied for leave to pursue a PG course but was denied due to Clause 3.1, which required one year of service before joining a PG program in the non-incentive category.
Non-Incentive Category Concerns
The petitioner’s counsel argued that, since she was admitted in the non-incentive category, she would not receive a salary while pursuing the PG course. Therefore, the one-year service condition was unnecessary and lacked any rational basis, according to the petitioner.
State Government’s Stand
The State argued that the one-year service requirement was intended to ensure that doctors served the PCMS cadre for some time before pursuing higher studies. The policy was introduced to prevent doctors from joining the PG course shortly after entering the service, leaving the department understaffed.
High Court’s Observations
The bench, comprising Justices Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Rohit Kapoor, noted that the policy should be examined from a broader perspective. It stated that the policy was designed to ensure that highly qualified doctors were available in the PCMS cadre, and it distinguished between incentive and non-incentive categories, with benefits like lien, continuity of service, and seniority even in the non-incentive category.
Rationale Behind the Policy
The court observed that without the minimum service requirement, a doctor could claim service benefits during the three-year PG course even after working for just a few days or weeks. In this case, the petitioner had only completed a month of service, making the one-year rule reasonable and justified.
Judgment and Conclusion
Accordingly, the High Court upheld the mandatory one-year service rule for PCMS doctors under the non-incentive category and refused to interfere with the State’s policy, emphasizing that the requirement serves a legitimate administrative purpose.
