Order

1. Mr. Mukesh Dave, learned AGC put in appearance in receipt of advance copy of writ petition.

2. Counsel for the petitioners submits that in a writ petition being SBCWP No.2936/2026 : Dr. Nidhi Punia v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., involving identical controversy, this Court while issuing notices to the respondents has granted interim order on 11.02.2026.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners are holding the post of Medical Officer and after completing PG course as an in-service candidate, the petitioners filled an application to undergo Senior Resident Course, as they are desirous of having the post of Assistant Professor for which the teaching and research experience includes one year Senior Residence in concerned subject in a permitted Medical College after acquiring the course of MD/MS. He also submits that an online application form for one year Senior Residency Course pursuant to notification dated 31.10.2025 and they have been declared selected for one year Senior Residency Course vide order dated 17.04.2026 and the petitioners are required to give their joining on or before 04.05.2026. However, despite their selection on merit, the respondents have failed to relieve the petitioners, thereby placing their career progression and academic advancement in serious jeopardy.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that reply has been filed yesterday and specific averment has been taken in the reply that posting of the petitioners was made in public interest and administrative exigency. He submits that in the reply it has been indicated that around 450 Doctors are selected for Senior Residency Course and about 800 Doctors are selected for Post-Graduation and relieving all Doctors simultaneously would seriously affect the Health Services. However, except for a bald assertion, no concrete data or material has been placed on record to substantiate the alleged acute shortage of doctors.

5. Contrary to the submissions of counsel for the respondents, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that marks acquired in the NEET-PG examination are taken into consideration for the purpose of getting selected in the Senior Residency Course and for preparing the merit list. He submits with grit that in the current circumstances the petitioners have acquired the appropriate merit to undergo the Senior Residency Course and in case the respondents do not permit them to join the same, the petitioners will suffer irreparable loss and injury, which can not be compensated at the later stage.

6. While drawing the attention of the Court, the counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondents vide circular dated 05.07.2022 have issued certain directions and in light of direction No.4, the candidate upon selection in the examination/interview or other educational activities, PG, DNB and other higher studies courses etc., will be relieved from the Control Officer and will join the post. He submits that despite the said circular the respondents are not relieving the petitioners to join the said Course. Prima facie, the action of the respondents in not relieving the petitioners appears to be contrary to their own policy decision.

7. At this stage, this Court is also guided by the constitutional perspective governing the issue. As rightly observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Dr. Rohit Kumar v. Secretary, Office of Lt. Governor of Delhi & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 2739 of 2021), doctors with advanced qualifications are an asset not only to the medical fraternity but also to society at large. After completion of the course, such doctors return to serve the cause of public health with enhanced skill and expertise.

8. Therefore, refusal of study leave or denial of permission to join a higher or career-advancement course solely on the ground of administrative inconvenience or a temporary shortage, without striking a balance between the constitutional rights of the petitioners and the long-term public interest, ca