DR. DEEPINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is serving as Medical Officer in a Rural Dispensary of Dayanand Medical College & Hospital, Ludhiana has filed the present petition seeking a direction to the State to grant incentive as provided in Regulation 9 (IV) of the Post-graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000 (for short, 'the Regulations') for the rural service being rendered by the petitioner for the purpose of admission to Post-graduate Courses. Initially, notification dated 14.10.2016 (Annexure P-8) issued for admission to Post-graduate Courses for the Session-2017 was placed on record, however, subsequently notification dated 29.3.2017 issued in supersession to earlier notification dated 14.10.2016 was also placed on record.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner passed his MBBS examination from Maharishi Markandeshwar University, Mullana in the year 2013. He was appointed as Medical Officer in the rural dispensary of Dayanand Medical College vide letter dated 15.9.2014. Ever since then, he is working there. Regulation 9 (IV) of the Regulations provides for giving incentives to the doctors serving in rural areas for the purpose of determination of their merit on the basis of number of years, a candidate has served in a remote and/or difficult areas. As the petitioner is serving in the rural dispensary being run by Dayanand Medical College from September, 2014 onwards, he is entitled to be given benefit of this period in the form of additional marks. While referring to a Division Bench judgment of this Court in CWP No. 7026 of 2017-Rajesh Kumar and another v. State of Punjab and others, decided on 26.4.2017, he submitted that the criteria laid down by the State in the notification that minimum of 4 years' service in very difficult (Category-D) area or 6 full years (72 months) service in difficult (Category-C) area or an appropriate combination of both has been set aside by this court while holding that benefit is to be granted even for one year service. He further submitted that Dayanand Medical College had been held to be a local authority, hence, the dispensaries/health centres run by it will be covered under proviso to Regulation 9 (IV) of the Regulations for grant of incentive. For the purpose, reliance was placed upon Anandi Mukta Sadguru v. V. R. Rudani and others, (1989) 2 SCC 691; Ravneet Kaur v. The Christian Medical College, Ludhiana, 1997(2) PLR 320 and Dr. Kuldip Singh v. Dayanand Medical College and Hospital Managing Society and others, 2002 (1) PLR 496.

(3.) On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submitted that admission to Post Graduate Courses has to be made in terms of the Regulations, as amended upto date, the vires of which has been upheld by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of U. P. and others v. Dr. Dinesh Singh Chauhan, (2016) 9 SCC 749. Regulation 9 (IV) of the Regulations provides for giving incentive to the in-service doctors working with Government/local authority and serving in remote/difficult areas. Dayanand Medical College cannot be said to be a local authority. It has merely been held to be an authority amenable to writ jurisdiction, hence, benefit of service rendered in Health Centre managed by Dayanand Medical College cannot be granted to the petitioner. Reservation of seats is made in the State strictly in terms of Section 6 of the Punjab Private Health Sciences Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission, Fixation of Fee and Making of Reservation) Act, 2006.