A doctor treating a patient at a PHC in Mogappair, Chennai. File
| Photo Credit: M. Vedhan
The Madras High Court has ruled that the deployment of specialist doctors at primary healthcare (PHCs) centres is not illegal. It has, however, directed the Tamil Nadu government to publish on its website the details regarding doctors on bond service and their places of posting in order to ensure transparency and avoid discrimination.
Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy issued the direction while disposing of a batch of writ petitions filed by 71 orthopaedicians, ophthalmologists, obstetricians and gynaecologists, dermatologists, otorhinolaryngologists, and other specialists against their deployment to primary healthcare centres (PHCs).
All the petitioners had pursued postgraduate education in government medical colleges in the State during different academic years. They had signed a bond to serve the government institutions for two years after completing their education offered at heavily subsidised costs using public funds.
However, after completing their courses, the petitioners had approached the court complaining they had been posted at PHCs run by the Greater Chennai Corporation instead of being deployed at government hospitals, which would have the infrastructure and facilities required for speciality treatment.
Their counsel Suhrith Parthasarathy said, a Government Order issued on August 20, 2009, states government doctors holding just MBBS degree alone would be posted at PHCs. When such was the stand of the government, how could it deploy postgraduate specialists at those PHCs for bond service, he wondered.
However, the judge disagreed with him and said, the G.O. was applicable only to government doctors and not to those on bond service. “Simply because specialists may be better utilised in specialist posts does not make the entire exercise (of deploying them at PHCs) illegal,” Justice Chakravarthy wrote.
He went on to write: “I also do not agree with the petitioners’ claim that their services are wasted. The effort invested in any PHC can never be considered a waste. Moreover, if these postgraduate doctors are assigned to PHCs, it is certainly for the benefit of the needy poor who visit and rely on these centres.”
The judge also said: “Except to state that, as far as possible, these candidates will be accommodated in the available speciality posts, I am not in a position to grant the petitioners’ request to be placed only in the specialist posts or to be released from bond service.”
Justice Chakravarthy, nevertheless, agreed with Mr. Parthasarathy that the State government could take a policy decision on setting aside a percentage of the speciality doctor vacancies for those rendering bond service before taking steps to fill up those vacancies through direct recruitment.
“The government can assess past data regarding the number of bond service doctors who have actually reported and served the bond period, and make efforts to accommodate them in speciality posts as far as possible by taking a policy decision in that regard,” the judge said.
He recorded a submission made by standing counsel N. Sneha, on behalf of the State government, that the bond service would be enforced without discrimination.
Published – March 13, 2026 11:54 am IST
