Treat COVID duty by PG medical students pursuing specialisation as part of compulsory bond service period: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court recently directed the Tamil Nadu government to treat COVID-19 duty undertaken by post graduate medical professionals, including those pursuing their "super specialisation", as part of their compulsory bond service [Dr Jayakrishnan MP v The State]. .Justice CV Karthikeyan directed the State government and the Directorate of Medical Education, Chennai to adjust against compulsory bond service period, the COVID-19 duty period of post graduate medical students, who had been pursuing specialisation when the pandemic hit."Every medical professional would appreciate the service at that critical period. Appreciation should be extended not only to those, who had completed the course but also to those who were studying in Super Specialty Courses. A student, who is studying in Super Specialty Courses had also exposed, would himself or herself to the infection. Taken into consideration the specialised courses which they were undergoing and the stage of their career, they could have easily avoided that duty and sought protection on the ground that they were students. The petitioners did not avoid the call for duty," the High Court said. As part of the bond agreement, the TN government requires all medical students to serve in a government facility for two years after they complete their degree. .The Court was hearing a petition filed by five doctors, who had completed their post graduation, and had been pursuing specilaisation when the Central government and the State urged all medical professionals to come forward to treat COVID19 patients. The petitioners, through their counsel Suhrith Parthasarathy, told the Court that they too volunteered for COVID duty at the time. They said that while the TN government treated the COVID duty services rendered by post graduate medical professionals, it was refusing to do so for the petitioners and others like them on the ground that they had been students at the time, and pursuing their specialisations. The petitioners urged the Court to direct the State to relieve them from their service which they had agreed to, in the bonds executed by them. They also urged the court to direct their college authorities to return their original certificates and documents along with their Super Specialty Degree certificates. The State government, however, argued that the petitioners were expected to complete two years of government service after the completion of their course and they "cannot take advantage of service rendered treating covid-19 patients during their study and expect that period to be adjusted with the two years bond period.".The petitioners told the Court that government doctors, who had completed their post graduation and had been part of the Covid duty, were favourably considered by the respondents and the period for which they had actually treated COVID patients had been off-set with the two years bond period. The petitioners argued that they were being treated "unequally" even though they had completed their post graduation degrees already when the pandemic hit, and were pursuing super speciality courses after their PG degrees. The Court held that when post graduate students, who had rendered service by treating covid-19 patients were accommodated by the respondents, there was no plausible reason advanced for the petitioners to be denied of adjustment of that period.The Court agreed with the petitioners' submissions and said that the present case seemed like unfair discrimination. "Voluntarily offering themselves to treat covid-19 patients could be by Post Graduates and incidentally also by those who are studying Super Specialty Courses after completing their Post Graduates course. The petitioners were studying Super Specialty Courses and I hold that the said fact should not be held against them. If they had avoided giving treatment to Covid 19 patients on the ground that they are studying Super SpecialtyCourses then, the petitioners could be found fault with. But they had also undergone the same risk and had treated the patients. The concept of adjustment of that service rendered during covid-19 is to also appreciated. The risk which the medical professionals had put themselves while treating the patients during the first phase of covid-19 when vaccinations had not been discovered put every front line workerat risk. Many of suffered that risk," the HighCourt said. It said that the health risk undertaken by the petitioners had to be treated as equal to that undertaken by post graduate doctors. It accordingly, directed the respondent State authorities to adjust the COVID duty period of the petitioners against the bond period and to return their certificates within three weeks.Advocate Suhrith Parthasarathy appeared for the petitioner doctors.Additional Government Pleader U Baranitharan appeared for the TN government and other respondent Medical education bodies. Advocate Shubharanjani Ananth appeared for the respondent National Medical Council. .[Read Judgment]