‘Won’t mess with SC’s PG med rules’
HC Upholds Junking Of GO On Considering Remote Areas
Sureshkumar.K@timesgroup.com
Chennai: 04.05.2018
In a setback to the state’s incentive marks scheme for government doctors aspiring for post-graduate medical admissions, the Madras high court upheld a single order quashing the list of remote and difficult areas eligible for incentive marks.
“When the Supreme Court has clearly set out guidelines to identify such areas for the purpose of PG medical admission, how can the high court interfere,” asked a vacation bench of Justice V Bharathidasan and Justice N Seshasayee on Thursday.
On April 18, a single judge quashed the Tamil Nadu government orders dated March 9 and 23 identifying remote and difficult areas while allowing a batch of petitions filed by MBBS doctors, alleging that the classification had not been made considering geographical parameters. Other contingencies like number of vacancies and work load alone had been considered, they said.
When the appeal came up for hearing on Thursday, the state argued that a committee of experts was constituted for classifying the areas. The committee, after considering all the parameters, identified certain areas as remotefor awarding incentive marks. But, the single judge had failed to consider facts and hence the order must be interfered with, said additional advocate general Manishankar.
Opposing the submissions, G Shankaran, counsel for the original petitioner, said the committee had in fact, failed to follow the guidelines set by the apex court and had not considered the geographical parameters. The bench also observed that the committee had categorised the areas in the perspective of the doctors and not as directed by the apex court.
“Incentive marks should be given to in-service candidates who sacrificed the comfort of living in a city and served in remote and difficult areas. Not based on number of vacancies or work load,” the bench said.
Representing candidates who support the government’s stand, advocate Richardson Wilson submitted that in some places which were in city limits, government doctors worked for more than 12 to 18 hours, but in some rural areas they worked only for a couple of hours. In such cases, the workload of doctors in urban areas must also be considered, he argued. However, the bench said the state must approach the SC for any clarification, since the admission process could not be stalled, as per apex court directive.
HC Upholds Junking Of GO On Considering Remote Areas
Sureshkumar.K@timesgroup.com
Chennai: 04.05.2018
In a setback to the state’s incentive marks scheme for government doctors aspiring for post-graduate medical admissions, the Madras high court upheld a single order quashing the list of remote and difficult areas eligible for incentive marks.
“When the Supreme Court has clearly set out guidelines to identify such areas for the purpose of PG medical admission, how can the high court interfere,” asked a vacation bench of Justice V Bharathidasan and Justice N Seshasayee on Thursday.
On April 18, a single judge quashed the Tamil Nadu government orders dated March 9 and 23 identifying remote and difficult areas while allowing a batch of petitions filed by MBBS doctors, alleging that the classification had not been made considering geographical parameters. Other contingencies like number of vacancies and work load alone had been considered, they said.
When the appeal came up for hearing on Thursday, the state argued that a committee of experts was constituted for classifying the areas. The committee, after considering all the parameters, identified certain areas as remotefor awarding incentive marks. But, the single judge had failed to consider facts and hence the order must be interfered with, said additional advocate general Manishankar.
Opposing the submissions, G Shankaran, counsel for the original petitioner, said the committee had in fact, failed to follow the guidelines set by the apex court and had not considered the geographical parameters. The bench also observed that the committee had categorised the areas in the perspective of the doctors and not as directed by the apex court.
“Incentive marks should be given to in-service candidates who sacrificed the comfort of living in a city and served in remote and difficult areas. Not based on number of vacancies or work load,” the bench said.
Representing candidates who support the government’s stand, advocate Richardson Wilson submitted that in some places which were in city limits, government doctors worked for more than 12 to 18 hours, but in some rural areas they worked only for a couple of hours. In such cases, the workload of doctors in urban areas must also be considered, he argued. However, the bench said the state must approach the SC for any clarification, since the admission process could not be stalled, as per apex court directive.
No comments:
Post a Comment