The Madhya Pradesh High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed by a doctor seeking release from a bond condition and return of original documents, observing that suppression of important facts disentitles a litigant from discretionary relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
The petition arose from the claim of the petitioner that the bond executed at the time of the admission stood cancelled, as no rural posting order was issued within 3 months from the declaration of results. Based on this, the petitioner has sought a declaration that the bond conditions were no longer enforceable.
Opposing the petition, the respondent submitted that the petitioner has suppressed the material fact, including that she was appointed as a regular medical officer by way of selection through MPPSC and was in government service at the time of undertaking her PG course.
After hearing both sides, the division bench of JusticeVivek Rusia and Justice Pradeep Mittal held that the rule regarding the deemed cancellation of the bond condition was not applicable to in-service candidates. The Court held that since the petitioner was appointed as a Medical Officer in the Department of Health Services and pursued the postgraduate course while in service, she was not required to undergo rural posting or submit a bond for that purpose. Upon completion of the course, she was required to rejoin her duties in accordance with service conditions.
The Court also held that suppression of material facts by the petitioner was, by itself, sufficient to dismiss the writ petition. Holding that the petitioner has not approached the court with clean hands, the court dismisses the writ petition. It clarified that if the petitioner wished to rejoin her duties as a Medical Officer, she would be required to serve in rural or remote areas in accordance with service requirements.
Appearance:
Senior Advocate Aditya Sanghi with Advocate Vinita Ahuja for the Petitioner.
Additional Advocate General Janhavi Pandit for the Respondent.
