Retention of original documents as a admission precondition is lawful under service bond agreements, and courts must observe judicial discipline in similar cases.

Judgment :

SAMEER JAIN, J.

1. Registry is directed to connect all these cases together.

2. The defects, pointed out by the Registry in the applications filed by the respondent-State for recalling/review of the orders passed by this Court, are overruled.

3. Since, the present writ petitions as well as the applications filed by the respondent-State for recalling/review of the order(s) passed by this Court involve common question of law, as such, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same are taken up for final disposal together and are being heard and decided by this common order. Consequently, considering the fact that the writ petitions warrant adjudication on common questions of law and fact; with the consent of learned counsel appearing on behalf of all the parties, SB Civil Writ Petition No.6559/2025 titled as Dr.Syed Shabaz vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors., is being taken up as the lead case qua the writ petitions and qua the application seeking recall/review of the order passed by this Court, SB Civil Misc. Application No.136/2025 (Dr.Kritesh Goel Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) is taken as a lead case. It is, however, considered apposite to clarify at the outset that though the subject matter in the petitions and the application is substantially similar or pertains to an identical legal issue, the factual matrix varies to some extent in each case. These factual distinctions, while not altering the core legal question, may have a bearing on the reliefs sought and the adjudication of individual claims. They do not impinge upon or detract from the common questions of law which fall for consideration before this Court. Accordingly, the judgment rendered herein shall apply to all the writ petitions and the applications for recalling/review connected and heard together with the lead matter, on a mutatis mutandis basis, subject to necessary adaptation to the individual factual contexts where required. FACTS OF THE CASE :-

4. The petitioner appeared in NEET PG - 2021 and was declared successful; subsequently he has also secured admission in the PG Course. During the course of admission procedure, the petitioner was directed to submit his original documents of previous qualification from the respective college, as compulsory pre-condition to secure admission in the preceding college.

5. The petitioner was further asked to execute a Service Bond/Undertaking in favour of the State Government to the effect that he will be duty-bound to serve the State Government after completion of the course for the prescribed period and thereafter for the further period of two years. On failure to carry out the service, in that eventuality, the petitioners-candidates will be liable to deposit a consequential amount as per bond conditions i.e. Rs.10,00,000/- (Rs. Ten lac).

6. It was submitted that retention of original documents is without any terms and conditions nevertheless is against the norms of National Medical Commission (NMC) as well as contrary to the norms of the judgment of the Apex Court, as the same is unconstitutional, yet the respondents bound the petitioner and alike persons, who here also admit that as a pre-condition for securing admission, they have deposited the original documents with the respondents.

7. It was further submitted that the petitioner appeared for final examination of PG Course in the month of January, 2025 and was declared successful in the month of February, 2025.

8. It was also submitted that though result was declared in the month of February, 2025 yet the State G