The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 321 of 2023 Dr.Priyadarsini Nanda …. Petitioner Mr.K.K.Mishra, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and others …. Opposite Parties Mr.T.K.Patnaik, A.S.C. CORAM: JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA Order No.
Decision
ORDER 17.01.2023 04. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard Mr.K.K.Mishra, learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as Mr.T.K.Patnaik, the learned Additional Standing Counsel. Perused the writ application and the documents annexed thereto. 3. The present writ application has been filed with the following prayer: “ In the aforesaid circumstance, the Petitioner humbly prays that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue notice the Ops calling upon them to show cause as to why the order of refusing to grant NOC under Annexure-5 shall not be quashed and consequently as to why she shall not be granted NOC for prosecuting her higher education/clinical fellowship in LV Prasad Institute under Annexure-4 with a condition that she will serve the remaining period as per the Bond terms and condition vide Government Resolution under Annexure-2. If the Ops fail to show cause or show insufficient cause then issue appropriate writ/writs commanding the O.P.No.1 to issue NOC to the Petitioner forthwith. And or to pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” // 2 // 4. The background fact of the present case in short is that the Petition on completion of her Post Graduate course in Ophthalmology at Bolangir was posted at Bolangir District H.Qrs Hospital on 28.12.2020. Thereafter on 03.07.2021 the Petitioner completed her degree in Master of Surgery in Ophthalmology. While this was the position, the Government of Odisha issued a Resolution dated 09.12.2021 superseding all previous Resolution. The said Resolution lays down the condition with regard to the bond to be executed by the Doctors in the State of Odisha. 5. While the Petitioner was serving at District H.Qrs Hospital, Bolangir, on completion of one year and six months of service as post P.G.Doctor was selected by OPSC to be appointed as Post P.G.doctor in Bolangir DHH vide letter dated 27.07.2022 under Annexure-3. Thereafter the Petitioner applied for clinical fellowship programme conducted by the L.V.Prasad Eye Institute, Bhubaneswar in the State of Odisha. On 15.12.2022 the Petitioner received intimation that she has been selected for prosecuting clinical fellowship progamme conducted by L.V.Prasad Eye Institute, Bhubaneswar. Accordingly the Petitioner applied for NOC to the Government. However, vide letter dated 02.01.2023 the Government of Odisha refused to grant NOC to the Petitioner to prosecute the clinical fellowship programme that has been offered to her by L.V.Prasad Eye Institute on the principal ground that the bond period of two years is not yet over. Challenging the said refusal to grant NOC, the Petitioner approached this Court by filing the present writ application. 6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the guidelines under Annexure-2 dated 09.12.2021 permits/grants the Petitioner to join post doctoral or Superspeciality course inside the State of // 3 // Odisha. However, there is an embargo for prosecuting such courses at a place outside the State of Odisha. He further submits that the programme which the Petitioner has opted for is available at one place i.e. L.V.Prasad Eye Institute, Bhubaneswar and none of the Government Colleges impart such programme. He further contended that the Government has also issued NOC in favour of similarly situated Doctors to prosecute such superspeciality courses, post- doctoral course or fellowship progrramme. 7. Mr.T.K.Patnaik, learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State referring to the Counter Affidavit filed by the State submitted that the Government has refused NOC on the ground that the Petitioner has not completed P.G. bond period of two years. Therefore, she is not entitled to get NOC from the Government to prosecute the course for which she is interested at the moment. It is also contended by the learned Additional Standing Counsel that there is an embargo in the guidelines itself to grant permission to the Doctors to prosecute such superspeciality/post doctoral course, fellowship programme outside the State of Odisha. In respect of such courses, imparted by the institution in the State of Odisha, the Government is considering the case and granting NOC in appropriate cases. Therefore, it is contended by the learned Additional Standing Counsel that after due consideration the Government found that the present case is not a case where NOC shall be granted by the Government. Therefore, he has taken a decision not to grant NOC in favour of the Petitioner. 8. In reply to the submissions made by the learned Additional Standing Counsel, Mr.Mishra, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner is ready and willing to furnish an undertaking that after completion of fellowship programme she will // 4 // come back to Government service and shall complete the period under P.G. Bond and he further added that the Petitioner is ready and willing to furnish such bond. In such view of the matter, Mr.Mishra, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that there is no legal bar for grant of NOC in favour of the Petitioner. 9. Having heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and upon a careful consideration of the guidelines as well as the background facts of the present case and taking into consideration the peculiar facts of the present case, this Court is of the considered view that the Petitioner, who is serving at a Government hospital to get his opportunity to upgrade her skill and knowledge by prosecuting superspeciality course which is available inside the State of Odisha and as such the same is permissible under the guidelines at Annexure-2 to the writ application Learned Additional Standing Counsel is also correct in his submission that the Petitioner according to the P.G.bond executed by her has to complete the period of serving under the bond in the Government is mandatory and further Clause 1(e) of the guidelines permits that during the bond period the Petitioner can be permitted to go for higher study subject to the condition that she will complete the residual period after completion of higher study. 10. In view of the aforesaid analysis, this Court is of the considered view that there is no embargo in granting NOC to the Petitioner for prosecuting the fellowship programme in L.V.Prasad Eye Institute, Bhubaneswar in the State of Odisha. Accordingly the Opposite Party No.1 is directed to issue NOC forthwith preferably within a period of one week from the date of production of certified copy of this order. The Opposite Party No.1 is directed to act on production of certified copy of this order. // 5 // 11. With the aforesaid observation the writ application stands disposed of. 12. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. RKS ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge