Gulshan Parkash & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Mr.N.K.Malhotra, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.Harish Rathee, Sr.DAG, Haryana, for the State. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. Number of Doctors, working as Medical Officers in District Jhajjar, have filed this writ petition for quashing of the orders through which they have been directed to perform their duties at all Primary Health Centres in the State on 24x7 hours basis. Whether a writ petition to maintain such a cause would lie was the first question posed to the counsel for the petitioners. Instead of making submission on the maintainability of such a petition, the counsel started arguing at tangent to say that the Civil Writ Petition No.7948 of 2009 : 2 : Doctors have been asked to perform duties 24 hours a week without providing necessary staff etc. In the writ petition, however, the grievance was entirely different. The prayer for quashing orders requiring them to remain present throughout the day in the entire week is made on the basis of the duty hours of Emergency Medical Officer, which the petitioners claim to have obtained under the Right to Information Act.

The real cause for the petitioners to make the present approach apparently is that they would now be required to remain present at the place of posting, which earlier as generally understood, the Doctors were able to avoid. The impugned communication would only show that the Chief Medical Officer has directed the Doctors to provide 24 hours service in all the seven days in a week after making a duty roster and it is not that each person or a doctor is required to perform the duties throughout a day. If there was any doubt in this regard, same has been clarified in the reply filed, wherein the State has also challenged the locus of the petitioners to maintain such a petition. It has rightly been pointed out in the reply that the State has an obligation to provide effective health services to its people. To ensure this, the State has made a provision for a network of 431 Primary Health Centres (PHCs), 93 Community Health Centres (CHCs) and 48 Sub-Divisional/District Hospitals.

PHCs and CHCs are statedly located in the rural areas/small towns and are meant to provide primary health care to people of small towns and the rural areas. It is disclosed in the reply that in order to strengthen the primary health care, State Government has formulated a liberal Civil Writ Petition No.7948 of 2009 : 3 : staffing norms for PHCs and CHCs and there are now three posts of doctors at PHC, which are MBBS Medical Officer, MBBS Lady Medical Officer and a Dental Doctor. Similarly, a provision has been made for six specialists and two MBBS Doctors at CHCs, besides a Dental Doctor. PHCs have five beds for indoor patients, while CHCs have 30 beds to cater for requirements of indoor patients. PHCs and CHCs are required to provide emergency health care at odd hours. Reply would also reveal that the State Government has also accepted the demand of improved emoluments of the doctors and, thus, would expect the doctors to maintain headquarters and reside at place of their posting.

This is so provided by Sub-rule 5 Appendix 17 to CSR Volume 1, Part-II, which is as under:- “No Government employee may leave his headquarters, during gazette holidays except with the permission of his immediate departmental superior, who must undertake the responsibility of granting such permission.” The reason why the doctors have been asked to maintain headquarters at the place of posting is to ensure that they are made to attend outdoor patients at odd hours and are available on call so as to render emergency health care to the patients in case of any need. The Government had found that the doctors were not maintaining headquarters and instead commuting to the PHCs/CHCs from very long distances. The Doctors, however, were showing themselves to be residing at PHCs and CHCs. This was leading to denial of proper health care to the patients due to non-availability of doctors and the Government was also burdened with the cost of paying house rent allowance, being falsely claimed.

Civil Writ Petition No.7948 of 2009 : 4 : It is also pointed out that the State is having a high rate of maternal and infant mortality and under the National Rural Health Mission, a lot of stress is being laid on increasing institutional deliveries to reduce maternal and infant deaths. It is in this regard that 24x7 services at the PHCs and CHCs have been ordered. Under this Scheme, three Addl. Staff Nurses at PHC and four Staff Nurses at CHC have also been provided. It is seen that the concept of 24x7 service at PHC does not entail round-the-clock services by any single doctor or a paramedical staff and it is by a team of such doctors that they are required to perform duties by following the duty roster. Despite the position as brought out above, the counsel for the petitioners insisted on pursuing the relief sought with vigour but without much conviction. The cause raised in the petition is not only unjustified but totally uncalled for.

Would the Courts have jurisdiction now to regulate the duty hours of Doctors?. Any interference in such issues would ultimately effect the public at large who need the services of Doctors. The petitioners are seen running away not only from their respective duties but from a social obligation for which they are expected to volunteer. They should realise that they are expected and required to serve the suffering humanity, which need them. The petitioner cannot be expected to shirk their responsibilities. Rather, it can be expected from doctors that they will voluntarily perform such services for the sake of humanity at large needing this service in the rural areas and in small towns. This writ petition basically seems to be aimed at avoiding the duty by the doctors and can not be appreciated. A doctor providing useful service to the rural areas Civil Writ Petition No.7948 of 2009 : 5 : cannot be expected to shirk responsibilities which appears to be the cause in the present writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. July 19, 2010 ramesh ( RANJIT SINGH ) JUDGE