PG medical admissions: TN govt justifies classification of remote & difficult areas
TIMES NEWS NETWORK
Chennai: 12.05.2018
Madras high court reserved its order on Tamil Nadu government norms for remote and difficult areas which would fetch incentive marks to in-service candidates in PG medical admissions. The government has filed the appeals against the April 18 order of a single judge quashing two government orders (GO) dated March 9 and 23.
After four hours of arguments, a vacation bench of Justice V Parthiban and Justice P D Audikesavalu said they would pass a detailed order. The single judge had quashed the GOs identifying remote and difficult areas while allowing a batch of petitions filed by government doctors alleging that the classification was not made considering the geographical parameters of the areas, but other contingencies like the number of vacancies and work load.
In its appeal, the state argued that an experts committee had been constituted for classifying the areas and it considered all parameters before identifying certain areas as remote and difficult for awarding incentive marks. The single judge had failed to consider facts that the identification was made only on the basis of the recommendations of the experts committee and hence the order must be interfered with, said the additional advocate general.
Opposing the submissions, counsel for the original petitioner contended that the committee had in fact failed to follow the guideline set by the apex court and had not considered the geographical parameters at all.
Counsel for candidates, who support the government’s stand, submitted that in some places which were geographically in city limits, government doctors worked for more than 12 to 18 hours, whereas in some rural areas they work only for a couple of hours. In such cases, the workload of doctors in such urban areas must also be considered.
This apart, the single judge has stepped into the shoes of an expert and has directed that such classification should be done only based on geographical parameters, whereas the Supreme Court itself has made it clear that other parameters like the socio-economic factors should also be considered.
IN OPPOSITION: Government doctors had alleged that the classification was not made considering the geographical parameters, but other contingencies like the number of vacancies and work load
TIMES NEWS NETWORK
Chennai: 12.05.2018
Madras high court reserved its order on Tamil Nadu government norms for remote and difficult areas which would fetch incentive marks to in-service candidates in PG medical admissions. The government has filed the appeals against the April 18 order of a single judge quashing two government orders (GO) dated March 9 and 23.
After four hours of arguments, a vacation bench of Justice V Parthiban and Justice P D Audikesavalu said they would pass a detailed order. The single judge had quashed the GOs identifying remote and difficult areas while allowing a batch of petitions filed by government doctors alleging that the classification was not made considering the geographical parameters of the areas, but other contingencies like the number of vacancies and work load.
In its appeal, the state argued that an experts committee had been constituted for classifying the areas and it considered all parameters before identifying certain areas as remote and difficult for awarding incentive marks. The single judge had failed to consider facts that the identification was made only on the basis of the recommendations of the experts committee and hence the order must be interfered with, said the additional advocate general.
Opposing the submissions, counsel for the original petitioner contended that the committee had in fact failed to follow the guideline set by the apex court and had not considered the geographical parameters at all.
Counsel for candidates, who support the government’s stand, submitted that in some places which were geographically in city limits, government doctors worked for more than 12 to 18 hours, whereas in some rural areas they work only for a couple of hours. In such cases, the workload of doctors in such urban areas must also be considered.
This apart, the single judge has stepped into the shoes of an expert and has directed that such classification should be done only based on geographical parameters, whereas the Supreme Court itself has made it clear that other parameters like the socio-economic factors should also be considered.
IN OPPOSITION: Government doctors had alleged that the classification was not made considering the geographical parameters, but other contingencies like the number of vacancies and work load
No comments:
Post a Comment