Uttarakhand High Court
Through: Shri Ashish Belwal vs State Of Uttarakhand on 7 December, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition (MS) No. 3113 of 2022
Dr. Peeyush Pandey. ................Petitioner.
Through: Shri Ashish Belwal, learned counsel for
the petitioner.
-Versus-
State of Uttarakhand
and others. .........Respondents.
Through: Shri Suyash Pant, learned Standing
Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand.
Date of Hearing & Order : 07.12.2022
Shri Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J.
1. By filing this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for
the following reliefs:
"(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
certiorari quashing/setting aside the order contained in
letter dated 04.08.2022 issued by respondent no.3 rejecting
the representation dated 21.07.2022 of the petitioner.
(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
certiorari quashing/setting aside the order contained in
letter dated 08.04.2022 issued by respondent no.3, so far it
relates to asking of Rs. 19,05,493/- from the petitioner from
freeing him bond.
(c) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
mandamus directing the respondents to return the whole
amount of Rs. 19,05,493/- after fully waiving the
remaining period of bond service/bond amount of the
petitioner as he has 2 been selected of Indian Armed Forces
or alternatively issue a writ, order or direction in the
nature of mandamus directing the respondents to return
with interest, the excess amount charged from the
petitioner after adjusting 12 months of service rendered by
the petitioner under bond from 30.03.2021 to 29.03.2022."
2. Learned Standing Counsel has vehemently opposed the
writ petition and submits that case should be heard after filing of
the counter affidavit.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in a
similar matter in WPMS No. 1982 of 2022 this Court directed the
State to take decision in the matter keeping in view the fact the
State is a welfare State and a model & benevolent employer.
4. The facts of the case are not disputed. The petitioner is a
permanent resident of the State of Uttarakhand studied MBBS
from Veer Chandra Singh Garhwali Government Institute of
Medical Sciences and Research, Srinagar, District Pauri Garhwal.
At the time of taking the admission, the petitioner executed a
Bond in favour of the State of Utarakhand that after completion
of his education, he will serve in the hilly area of Uttarakhand for
3 years. He has already passed out the MBBS examination and
obtained a degree. He has discharged his duties of one year as
Junior Resident in the Veer Chandra Singh Garhwali Government
Institute of Medical Sciences and Research, Srinagar, District
Pauri Garhwal. However, in the meantime, he appeared in the
competitive examination and has been selected to serve in the
Armed Forces Medical Services.
5. In that view of the matter, he made a representation to the
Government of Uttarakhand to exempt him the Government
compulsory service for the additional two years. The State of
Uttarakhand, thereafter, intimated him that he should deposit
Rs.19,05,493/- in lieu of the services he has not rendered to the
State Government.
6. This Court is of the opinion that when a son of this soil,
who is a permanent resident of the State of Uttarakhand, is
serving in the Defence Forces as a Medical expert, the State as a
welfare State and Model Benevolent employer, should take into
consideration the services he is going to render to the nation and
should waive the recovery of money as per the Bond executed by
him. But, it has come to our notice that the petitioner has already
deposited the amount mentioned above under protest and he has
already joined the Armed Forces Medical Services.
7. In that view of the above, we are of the opinion that the
State of Uttarakhand should take a lenient view. Hence, the writ
petition is disposed of directing the Secretary, Medical Education,
State of Uttarakhand to reconsider the matter and decide whether
to refund the money of the petitioner or not within a period of 45
days from the date of production of certified copy of this order
before him.
8. We hope and trust that the concerned authorities will
decide the case of the petitioner keeping in mind the nature of the
Indian State as enshrined in the preamble of India and the fact
that the petitioner is volunteering himself to serve the Nation by
being part of the Indian Armed Forces.
(Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J.)
(Grant urgent certified copy of this judgment, as per Rules)
SKS
