Summary
Haryana’s identification of remote/difficult areas for postgraduate medical admission weightage was invalid because it used irrelevant criteria without adequate data and was implemented before Gazette publication. Doctors’ reluctance or vacancies alone could not define remoteness. Counselling contrary to the interim order was void; a fresh lawful notification and limited admission extension were permitted.
Issues
- Whether Haryana validly identified remote/difficult areas for service weightage.
- What followed from counselling contrary to the Court’s interim order.
Provisions considered
- Regulation 9(IV), proviso, Postgraduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000The power to grant service incentives was enabling and had to be exercised fairly, reasonably and for its proper purpose. (¶¶ 7–15, 17)
Held
- The State had to identify remote/difficult areas using relevant conditions and then assess doctor availability, rather than infer remoteness from reluctance or vacancies. Old transfer criteria and a rushed, unsupported exercise were insufficient. (¶¶ 7–10, 13–15)
- Geography, accessibility, social and economic conditions and impediments to medical care were relevant; the cited resource-centre document offered guidance, with criteria capable of variation between States. (¶ 10–13)
- Counselling conducted against the interim order was invalid from inception. The officials’ conduct was deprecated; the Court described the matter as fit for contempt proceedings without recording a contempt conviction. (¶ 16)
Result
Appeals dismissed. If Haryana wished to grant weightage, it had to issue a fresh proper notification within one week; the admission deadline was extended to June 10, 2017.