IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Manmohan, Navin Chawla, JJ.
Arjun Saili - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 2109 of 2021 & CM Appls. 6152-53 of 2021 & CM Appl. 10302 of 2021
Decided On : 26-08-2021
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's request for document return and bond cancellation. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. respondent's claim based on fraud and document retention. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. citations of relevant decisions supporting bond enforcement. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 4. court's decision on document retention and ongoing recovery actions. (Para 13 , 14) |
| 5. retention of original documents is unlawful; original documents must be returned. (Para 15 , 16 , 20) |
| 6. final order on the case with directives and cost implications. (Para 21 , 22) |
JUDGMENT
Navin Chawla, J. (Oral)--The hearing has been conducted through video conferencing.
2. This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondent nos. 1 and 2 to return the original documents of the petitioner that were submitted with them by the petitioner at the time of his admission as a Post Graduate Trainee in MD (Anesthesia) at the Army Hospital (R&R).
2.1. The petitioner further prayed for an order directing the respondents to withdraw and cancel the Surety Bond dated 28.06.2014 executed by the petitioner.
3. By a subsequent application, being CM No. 10302 of 2021, the petitioner sought to add yet another prayer to the petition by seeking quashing of the letter dated 17.05.2018 issued by the respondent no. 2 that directed the petitioner to pay the cost of training from the date of his joining as MD (Anesthesia) till the date the petitioner was declared medically unfit, that is, an amount of Rs. 25,93,890/- (Rupees twenty- five lakhs ninety-three thousand eight hundred ninety).
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that she confines her prayer in the present petition only to the prayer seeking the return of the original documents that were submitted by the petitioner at the time of his admission.
5. The petitioner had appeared in the All India Post Graduate Medical Entrance Examination (AIPGMEE) and was selected for admission (Priority V candidate) as a Post Graduate Trainee in MD (Anesthesia) as a stipendiary candidate at AIPGMEE counselling (Extended), conducted by the respondent no. 1 on 20.06.2014.
6. The petitioner, on selection, was issued an admission offer dated 21.06.2014, which inter alia required the petitioner to execute a notarised bond agreement to serve as a Short Service Commission Officer (SSC service) for five years with the Armed Forces Medical Services or pay an amount of Rs. 25 lakhs to the Government of India, if unwilling to join upon the successful completion of the course. The petitioner was also to submit all original certificates, to be kept in the custody of the Academic Cell, Army Hospital (R&R), Delhi Cantt., till the completion of the course. The relevant terms of the offer letter are reproduced hereinbelow:
"4. You are required to execute a notarized bond agreement by 27 Jun 2014 to serve as Short Service Commission Officers (SSC service) for 5 years with the Armed Forces Medical Services or pay an amount of Rs.25 Lakh to Govt. of India, if unwilling to join on successful completion of the course.
5. You will have to submit all Original Certificates which will be kept in the custody of Academic cell, Army Hospital (R&R), Delhi Cantt till completion of your course."
7. In due compliance with the above stipulation, the petitioner executed a Surety Bond dated 28.06.2014, the terms and conditions of which are reproduced hereinbelow:
"1. KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENT (1) I, Dr Arjun Saili s/o Dr Arvind Saili resident of 963, Vikas Kunj New Delhi 110018, hereinafter called the PG Student (which expression shall include his/her heirs, executors, administrators and representatives ) Dr. Arti Devgon daughter of Air Cmde (Retd) Shri O.P Devgon resident of 963 Vikas Kunj New Delhi 110018, at present employed as Chief Medical Officer Central Health Services (CGHS) New Delhi, hereinafter called the 'Surety' (which expression shall include his heirs, executors, administrators and representative) are jointly and severally
AI
Retention of original documents without explicit contractual authorization is illegal; respondents must return them while retaining the right to pursue recovery for training costs.
Retention of original certificates as security for payment must be supported by the terms and conditions of admission and lawful authority, and cannot be sustained without proper legal basis.
The bond agreement is valid and enforceable, and the original certificates must be returned despite non-payment of the bond.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's use of mandamus to compel the respondents to return the original documents submitted by the petitioners, with an undertaking from the p....
Educational certificates cannot be retained as lien for service bond breach; recovery via legal remedies only.
The court established that withholding original documents post-completion of a course is illegal unless explicitly permitted by the terms of a service bond.
The execution of a Surety Bond involves a conscious bargain, and the student must abide by its terms even in unforeseen circumstances.
Retention of original certificates by government bodies is unlawful without due process, particularly after course completion.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.