Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dr .Sushmita Ramana Katakdhond vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 23 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:18553
1 WP-10008-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VINAY SARAF
ON THE 23 rd OF APRIL, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 10008 of 2025
DR .SUSHMITA RAMANA KATAKDHOND
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Ashish Anand Barnad, Shri Aditya Khandekar and Shri Yash Choubey
- Advocates for the petitioner.
Shri Darshan Soni - Government Advocate for the respondents/State.
Shri Sanjeev Tuli - Advocate for the respondent nos.2, 3 and 4.
ORDER
Per: Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva
1 . Pursuant to order dated 02.04.2025, respondents no.2 to 4 are
represented and the respondent no.4 is personally present.
2 . As the respondent no.4 has entered appearance, hence the bail bonds
stand discharged.
3 . Petitioner has filed the subject petition seeking a direction to the
respondents to permit the petitioner to continue to work as a Junior Resident in
ESIC Hospital, Sonagiri, Bhopal till 22.3.2017 in terms of the bond furnished by
her.
4. Petitioner was admitted for the course of Bachelor of Dental Sciences in
Employee State Insurance Corporation, Dental College, Gulbarga on 30th August,
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:18553
2 WP-10008-2025
2018. As per the conditions for selection, petitioner was require to furnish a bond
to serve for a period of 3 years in the ESI Corporation/ESI scheme of the State
Government. Pursuant to the said selection, petitioner furnished the bond and was
accordingly funded by the respondents for the education. She furnished the bond
that after completion of her course, she shall serve for a period of 3 years.
Subsequently, by an office memorandum dated 28.07.2020, respondents revised
the bond condition and reduced the bond duration from three years to one year.
Said Circular stipulated that all existing under-graduate students would be
required to execute fresh bond with revised condition; failing which they would be
governed by their origin bond conditions. As per the petitioner, petitioner did not
opt for furnishing a revised bond and as such claims to be covered by the earlier
bond condition i.e. of serving in ESI Corporation/ESI scheme of the State
Government for a period of three years after competition of the course.
5 . Subject petition has been filed contending that the petitioner has been
informed that her residency period would be only one year concluding on
21.03.2025.
6 . Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner had
furnished the bond on a condition that she shall continue to serve for a period of
three years and since she has not opted for the change of bond condition, as was
required by the office memorandum dated 28.07.2020, she is bound to serve for a
period of three years. She submits that unilaterally the respondents are curtailing
the said period from three years to one year. He submits that this is in breach of
the bond condition and the respondents cannot curtail the service period from
three years to one year and are bound to permit the petitioner to continue for the
entire three years period, as agreed by her in the bond furnished by her to the
respondents read with the Circular dated 28.07.2020.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:18553
3 WP-10008-2025
7 . Per contra, learned counsel for respondents submits that the bond is
executed by the students and is binding on the students and there is no counter-
obligation on the part of the respondents to permit the students to continue for the
entire bond period. He submits that the reciprocal promise to be performed by the
respondents was to fund the education of the petitioner, which the respondents did
and after the period was over, petitioner was though bound to serve for a period of
three years, however, the department subsequently decided to curtail the period
from three years to one year. He further submits that subsequently an office order
dated 06.03.2024 was issued, which stipulated that irrespective of the bond period
that was signed, the tenure for bond posting would be only one year.
8 . We may note that in the instant case, the bond was furnished by the
petitioner on 30.08.2018 and the recital of the bond stipulates that Corporation
had agreed to incur the expenses of the education of the petitioner on the condition
that after successful competition of the course of study, petitioner shall serve ESI
Corporation/ESI Scheme of the State Government for a period of three years
anywhere in the India. There is no condition stipulated in the bond or any
agreement on behalf of the respondents that they are bound to take the services of
the petitioner for a period of three years. Even if the contention of learned counsel
for the petitioner were to be accepted that the bond itself amounts to a contract,
reference may be had to section 63 of the Contract Act, 1872, which stipulates that
"every promisee may dispense with or remit, wholly or in part, the performance of
the promise made to him".
9. In the present case, even if the bond is treated to be a contract between
the parties, then the respondent i.e. the promissee has chosen to dispense with the
performance of the promise made by the petitioner to the respondents. There can
be no imposition on the respondents to permit the petitioner to continue to serve
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:18553
4 WP-10008-2025
for a period of three years, if the promisee i.e. respondent does not desire said
services. No doubt, petitioner would be bound by the terms of the bond, however,
there is no reciprocal promise made by the respondents to permit the petitioner to
continue, which the petitioner can seek enforcement of.
10. Reference may be had to a judgment of a Division Bench of the High
Court of Delhi in Dr. Ankit Sharma and others Vs. Union of India 2024 SCC
Online Del 6370, wherein in identical circumstances, the Division Bench of the
Delhi High Court has opined that the bond is a unilateral document and does not
stipulate any duty on the part of the ESIC to avail or to seek services from the
executors thereof and further the bond does not stipulate or contemplate any
consequence monitory or otherwise in case, the ESIC does not avail of the
services of the executor of the bond.
11. As noticed hereinabove, there is no reciprocal condition on the part of
the respondents to permit the petitioner to continue in service for a period of three
years. Respondents have already performed their part of the obligation under the
bond of funding the education of the petitioner. Respondents having subsequently
taken a decision to curtail the period from three years to one year. This stipulation
works in favour of the students including the petitioner and petitioner cannot thus
insist on continuing for a period of three years. In any event, there can be no
specific performance of such a contract at least at the asking of the student to force
the respondents for permitting the petitioner to continue in service.
12. We find no merit in the petition. The petition is accordingly dismissed.
13. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the
respondents have decided not to permit the petitioner to continue and are not
seeking to enforce the bond, the bond submitted by the petitioner be discharged
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:18553
5 WP-10008-2025
and the bank guarantee submitted be also discharged and returned to the petitioner
along with the original documents of the petitioner.
14. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the relevant
bond and documents were submitted to the ESIC Dental College, Gulbarga and
the Respondents shall within a period of two weeks intimate the said institution
about the discharge of the bond and no further requirement of the petitioner to
serve under the bond and direct them to proceed further in accordance with law
for discharge of the bond and bank guarantee and and return of the original bank
guarantee and documents of the petitioner. The statement is taken on record.
(SANJEEV SACHDEVA) (VINAY SARAF)
JUDGE JUDGE
TG /-
