O R D E R

The petitioners herein joined M.Ch. in Neuro Surgery in September 2019 and completed the course in September 2022. At the time of joining the course, they executed a bond to serve for two years and they have been provided with posting orders on 29.03.2023, well within the bond period and they are now serving. The petitioners submit that both these doctors have served during Covid period even when they were students. This period needs to be adjusted against the bond period and placed reliance on the ratio in Dr.Jayakrishnan M.P. and others vs. The State of Tamil Nadu and others in W.P. No.26556 of

2022 dated 02.02.2023.

2.Heard the learned Special Government Pleader, who submitted that the petitioners rendered service when they were only students and that cannot be reckoned.

3.In Dr.Jayakrishnan M.P. and others vs. The State of Tamil Nadu and others in W.P. No.26556 of 2022 dated 02.02.2023. this court has faced the identical question and it answered the same as follows: "8. It is however contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that those Government Doctors, who had completed their Post Graduation and did Covid-19 duty were favourably considered by the respondents and the period for which they had actually treated Covid-19 patients were off-set with the two years period of any Government Service. It is therefore contended that the petitioners are treated unequally and that they were studying Super Specialty Courses after completing their Post Graduation. It is contended that when Post Graduates, who had rendered service by treating covid~19 patients were accommodated by the respondents, there was no plausible reason advanced for the petitioners to be denied of adjustment of that period.

9. The only issue therefore to be examined by this Court is whether the rendering of service to Covid-19 patients while a student can be considered favourably by the respondents for that period to be off-set with the two years of Government Service, which is expected to be discharged in issue of the bonds executed.

10. It is an admitted case that treatment of Covid-19 patients, by Post Graduate students, post completion of their course is accepted as part of the two years bond period. The petitioners herein after completion of their Post Graduation had joined Super Specialty Courses. While they were students in the various Super Specialty Courses, they had rendered service treating Covid-19 patients.

11. The core issue is that the petitioners had actually volunteered, as medical professionals as front line warriors, helping out those, who had suffered from Covid-19. The fact that the petitioners did so offer their service is not in doubt and not disputed by the respondents herein.

12. The only aspect is that the petitioners were unfortunately studying Super Specialty Courses at that particular point of time. The core issue is thus the voluntary offering of medical service to treat Covid-19 patients.

Voluntarily offering themselves to treat Covid-19 patients could be by Post Graduates and incidentally also by those who are studying Super Specialty Courses after completing their Post Graduates course. The petitioners were studying Super Specialty Courses and I hold that the said fact should not be held against them. If they had avoided giving treatment to Covid 19 patients on the ground that they are studying Super Specialty Courses then, the petitioners could be found fault with. But they had also undergone the same risk and had treated the patients. The concept of adjustment of that service rendered during Covid- 19 is to also appreciated. The risk which the medical professionals had put themselves while treating the patients during the first phase of Covid-19 when vaccinations had not been discovered put every front line worker at risk. Many of suffered that risk.

13.Viewed from the angle of rendering of medical service either as students of Super Specialty courses as professionals, who had completed Post Graduation and not stud