Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh. 
News

Punjab and Haryana High Court grants relief to doctors suspended over poor sex ratio

The Court ordered the State to permit the doctors to join their original places of posting.

Bar & Bench

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has stayed the Haryana government's recent decision to suspend four doctors on the ground of poor monitoring and implementation of measures relating to the improvement of sex ratio.

Justice Sandeep Moudgil issued notice to the State and asked it to respond to the petitions. The Court ordered the State to permit the doctors to join their original places of posting in the meantime.

The matter will be heard next on October 27.

"Till the next date of hearing, further proceedings pursuant to the suspension order dated 18.05.2026 against the petitioners shall remain stayed," the Bench said in an order passed on May 27.

Justice Sandeep Moudgil

The doctors granted relief include Dr Vijay Parmar, Dr Tina Anand, Dr Parbha Yadav and Dr Satypal, who are posted at health centers in Haryana.

It was argued that the health department suspended the medical officers on May 18 and initiated disciplinary proceedings against them for poor performance in ensuring effective monitoring and implementation of measures to improve the sex ratio in Haryana.

As per media reports, Haryana's Sex Ratio at Birth (SRB) fell to 895 girls per 1,000 boys during the first four months of 2026.

The doctors argued that action against them was arbitrary and taken with a pre-determined mind without considering the material on record.

Advocate Himani Anand represented the petitioners.

Deputy Advocate General Mayuri Lakhanpal Kalia represented the State.

[Read Order]

Dr Vijay Parmar v State of Haryana & Ors.pdf
Preview

All retiring Supreme Court judges to be made honorary members of SCBA: President Vikas Singh

Senior Advocate Surojit Nath Mitra appointed new Advocate General of West Bengal

Taking part in protests not ground to deny bail in PMLA case: Delhi High Court

Delhi HC admin says DHCBA plea against judges’ committee on pecuniary jurisdiction is not maintainable

When the court live-streams a draft order: The transparency gap

SCROLL FOR NEXT