2025:UHC:7509 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS/2515/2025 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. Pooran Singh Rawat, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Suyash Pant, Standing Counsel for the State. 2. Petitioners pursued M.B.B.S course from Government Medical College in the State of Uttarakhand at subsidised fees upon executing a bond to serve in the State for a period of three years. 3. According to petitioners, they have completed three years’ service as per condition of the bond. State Government is not willing to extend contractual appointment of petitioners any further, while petitioners insist that they want to serve State of Uttarakhand for more period and therefore, surety bond executed between them and the State Government, be extended. Learned counsel for the petitioners relies upon an order passed by coordinate Bench for the said purpose. 4. Learned State Counsel, however, submits that requirement of executing a bond was in view of the then prevailing conditions as there were acute shortage of doctors in State of Uttarakhand, therefore, anyone who received subsidised education at State’s expense was required to given an undertaking that he will serve for the prescribed period in Uttarakhand. He submits that since process for regular appointment on the post of Medical Officer is on and there are very few vacancies left, therefore, it is for the competent authority in the State, to 2025:UHC:7509 examine the claim of petitioners for extension of their contractual bond and petitioners cannot insist that they may be permitted to continue in service even by extending the period of bond. 5. This Court finds substance in the submission made by learned State Counsel. The bond was required to be executed for a different purpose, namely, to ensure availability of doctors in remote corners of State of Uttarakhand which were not having doctors at the relevant point of time. 6. If sufficient numbers of regular doctors are now available in State of Uttarakhand, then in such circumstances, State Government cannot be directed to engage petitioners on contract or to extend their bond period when there are no vacancies available for their adjustment. 7. Reliance made by petitioners’ counsel on order passed by coordinate Bench is misconceived. Writ Petition, however, is disposed of with liberty to petitioners to make representation to the Director General, Medical Health and Family Welfare, Dehradun for their re- engagement. If petitioners make such representation to the competent authority within two weeks from today, competent authority shall look into the matter and take decision as per law, within three months thereafter. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 25.08.2025 Mahinder/ MAHINDER SINGH Digitally signed by MAHINDER SINGH DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=da6212e6e78d94ed3134842bc6a8d6ca168979ca7b8c2f031a92d1a18b089 23c, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=AB77B7C5B240908B392BE84F5CDD4C2AF35DC4626D305B1BC9EA4 BABA43D2B8F, cn=MAHINDER SINGH Date: 2025.08.25 17:50:15 +05'30'