CHENNAI: Postgraduate (PG) medical admissions in Tamil Nadu have run into trouble this year as well. The Madras High Court on Wednesday struck down a state government order identifying challenging areas for granting of incentive marks to government doctors during PG admissions. Justice S Vaidyanathan in his order said there were serious anomalies in the state government’s method of identifying remote, difficult and rural areas. The government order had been challenged by a set of doctors, including those working at government hospitals, whose chances at PG admissions were adversely affected by the list of areas identified by the TN government.
Health secretary J Radhakrishnan told Express the government would likely appeal against the order. “We are yet to receive a copy of the court order. After studying it, we will discuss with legal experts and go for appeal,” he said, pointing out that a recent MCI amendment of regulations had permitted incentive marks to government doctors serving in rural areas. Last year too, PG medical admissions ran into a series of legal hurdles mainly over the issue of incentive marks specially awarded to government doctors during admission counselling as well as over demands of government doctors seeking 50 per cent reservation in seats falling under the state quota.
The Medical Council of India’s (MCI) deadline for PG admissions is May 31 but it is uncertain if the State would be able to meet it. Wednesday’s order was passed on a batch of writ petitions from Dr P Pravin and three others who contended that the list of “rural and remote” areas identified by the state government affected their scope of gaining admission to PG courses. “The petitioners work in rural Primary Health Centres and are given special rural allowance. However, they are not given the benefit of incentive marks for serving in remote/difficult areas.
However, doctors working in district headquarters with payment of city allowance are given the benefit of weightage of marks for serving in remote/ difficult areas. Hence, on the face of it, there is a serious anomaly in the method of identification of remote/difficult areas as per the impugned orders and thereby they are liable to be interfered with,” their counsel G Sankaran contended. Meanwhile, Justice Vaidyanathan, in a different order, ruled that 50 per cent reservation could not be granted in the all-India quota. The court ruled that MCI regulations allowed for 50 per cent reservation in diploma programmess only in State quota.