Bonds for compulsory service post-medical education are legally valid and do not contravene public policy, provided students consented to the terms upon admission.

JUDGMENT

S. MANIKUMAR,CJ.

Instant appeal is filed challenging the judgment dated 06.11.2020 in W.P.(C) No.24628 of 2019. The appellants have filed the writ petition seeking the following reliefs:

1. Issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or order quashing clause 10.1.2 of Exts.P1 and P2 relating to compulsory service of one year.

2. Issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or order quashing Clause V (b) of Exhibit P3 and Clause VI (b) of Ext.P4 relating to compulsory Service and penalty for violation of bond.

3. Issue appropriate writ or order declaring that petitioners are not liable to compulsorily serve or work under respondents 1 to 3 for any period based on any conditions in Exhibits Pl to P4.

4. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding respondents to exclude the petitioners from doing compulsory duty on bond for one year in RCC, Thiruvananthapuram or in other Medical Colleges as stipulated in Exhibits Pl and P2.

5. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 3rd respondent to consider and take appropriate action on Ext.P5 within a time limit to be specified by this Hon'ble Court.

2. The issues raised in the appeal relating to compulsory bonded service as per the prospectus published by the State Government for the postgraduate medical course for the academic year 2017-2018, have already been decided by us in the judgment dated 03.11.2020 in W.A. No. 1666 of 2020 and connected case. The relevant paragraphs of the said judgment are extracted hereunder:

30. After a threadbare analysis of the issues and taking into account the contractual clauses and the provisions of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 , the findings were rendered therein that the doctrine of public policy is highly subjective, shifting, and even changing, and statutorily examined, the compulsion of the students fulfilling the bond-obligation does not seem to fall foul of any public policy. It was further held that the Central Government, through the prospectus, permitted the College, University, or the State Government, to impose its own conditions for admission, and therefore, the students consciously consented to the conditions, executed the bonds, and never challenged them, until they completed their course;that the students have a weak bargaining power in a contract entered into with the College or the establishment. It was also held that education occupies the pride of place, and the students deserve sympathy. But, the State has acted in its permissible limits and imposed an eligibility criterion; the student agreed and got admitted, whereby the State compelled the student to serve one year in the State, where the student had honed his/her medical skills and acquired a higher qualification. It was also held that after all the State invests and subsidizes medical education and In the scenario of limited resources, spending somewhere amounts to not spending somewhere else and so those who get benefited must repay debt-of gratitude.

31. Having gone through Exhibit-P1 Government order dated

15.05.2017, in particular, clause (9), the bond executed by the appellants along with other essential facts and materials, we are of the view that the learned single Judge was right in holding that the issues are appropriately guided by the decision of this court in Ayisha Beegam's case (cited supra). However, the 1st appellant in W.A. No.1666 of 2020 has not executed a bond admittedly. Therefore, the contention advanced by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants was that having not executed a bond, the institution is bound to return the certificates submitted by the 1st appellant.

32. In order to analyse the situation, we have again gone through the prospectus approved by the State Government on 2.3.2017, wherein clause 12-2.5 guides the said issue, which we have extracted above. It clearly specifies that no admission shall be valid without getting the bond ex