CHENNAI: The state health department has reduced the bond period from two years to one year for non-service PG degree and diploma doctors who completed their courses in 2023. The decision was taken after a committee formed by the Directorate of Medical Education on the instructions of the Madras High Court recommended the changes. Going forward, the bond period will be revised every year depending on the need and availability of vacancies in government hospitals, said the order issued by Health Secretary Gagandeep Singh Bedi on Wednesday.
The health department has also reduced the bond amount from Rs 40 lakh to Rs 20 lakh for PG degree doctors and from Rs 20 lakh to Rs 10 lakh for PG diploma doctors. This is the amount that doctors have to pay to the government if they violate the bond condition.
According to sources, there are around 700 non-service PG doctors across the state. Dr Keerthy Varman, past president of, Tamil Nadu Medical Students Association (TNMSA), said a majority of the doctors don’t want to serve a bond period.
It is welcome that they reduced the bond period to one year. “We wanted them to reduce it because we usually do not get postings in our chosen specialty. Some doctors are even posted at Primary Health Centres. There are other issues too,” he said. The PG non-service doctors are paid `56,700 plus dearness allowance as stipend during the bond period.
Petitioner showed appointment notification’s copy on his phone
He also intimidated the authorities by sending representations to the Chief Secretary and various other officials by projecting himself as a high court judge, the counsel said.
When Justice Pugalendhi questioned the litigant in this regard, he stood by his stand and claimed he was appointed by the Government of India as an additional judge of the HC of Punjab and Haryana. He also showed the court a copy of his appointment notification dated September 19, 2021, through his mobile phone.
Justice Pugalendhi observed that a plain reading of the notification raises suspicion over its genuineness. Moreover, the petitioner himself has filed an experience certificate allegedly issued by the Madras High Court Advocates’ Association on October 25, 2023, as per which he enrolled as an advocate in 2014 and has been practising before the Supreme Court of India and Chandigarh High Court, among others, for the past 10 years.
He therefore directed the CBI to register a case and investigate the genuineness of the notification, those responsible for the fabrication of the same and also whether the petitioner has availed any benefits by using it. The court also collected the mobile phone of the petitioner to be handed over to the CBI as evidence. Since there has been no interim order in the petition in the last nine years and the SIDCO already took custody of the shed concerned early this year, the judge dismissed the petition.
It could be noted that the petitioner has made several other claims including that he is a Guinness record holder and has completed several degrees in various subjects.