in THE HIGH court? or KARNATAKA AT ~ ”
DATED 1’1-us THE 22″ DAY OF JANUARY,’ ‘
PRESENT
mm HOWBLE am. P.l). nINAKARAx;’m?’uEF Jfigficfi ”
AND _ % 4
THE I-IOWBLE MR.&£E_§TIQE’;”V’# §,!§{fi3HA!;iIT”
Writ Petitiog No. 142%’ T_
Writ PIL)
writ Petjggon No. ;4$:91″:%:§§£_V 2o1<).3j_:' 39 %
Between: …. N "
B.Krishna Bhai.
Aged about 376 V ._ =
Son of late B. Nan}’iya:1.a Bhat ; = V
510.399, 3 P Road T V’
Girfigagar, Be_inga}ore 5661,08 V : Petitioner
(By Advocate}
V cf
A _ Principal Sqcmtary
oepa-rtmnjt of Healtll and Medical Services
‘!_1’ka_sV$oudI}iaa, Dr Ambcdkar Veeclhi
‘ ‘ . Bangalore’ 560 ()0 I
State Government Medical
. ‘£);fi<:'t:x§s Association, by its Secretary
.. filialisia Rao circic, Bangalore 560 009
3. Medicai Council of india
by its Secretazy,
No.9, Temple Lane, Khotle Road _
New Delhi 1 19 011 :Respo’:Jg:1cI1ts ?’
(Sm: Niloufer Akbar, AGA for R1; 2 A .g _ . V V .
Sri Ravi Verma Kumar, Senior Advocate, =__for;-£~.’a?vi 2/rams
Associates, for R2 W A V– ‘
Szi N.Khetty, Advocate for R3 )
Writ petition filed under Articles 326 Sn 227 off the
Constitution of India praying to dixeQt~~–f3i1é”.rc5&pondei1i:s;. 3./to 3 to
make necessary efforts to mstbre ‘i;11e_assistancc and
service to the patients ail over the ‘ [tails it Wa§sA.be»fQm etc,
Writ D¢tit__i_g1_ No.14gs5-gggoas’ ~ I’; V
Between:
S.V-asudeva, _
Advocate, aged ‘abcut 68 ‘3x§a,;~s V ” ~
Ne.?8/2,Sus1me’ia Road
Doddamavallj ” _ Q ,
Baliigalore 56,5004 ” ‘ :Pet1’tio}:1er
{Sz*I§3 .Va$u1;l.c§§:a,”;)a1*1;3f-in~;5éféi$i1)
And: V
.. The G<'m;r1 xmgtit L:«'§3i"i{a111ata}{a
By its Chief fiecyctaxjfr,
. . .'.«{i§,_ha12a soudhgz, 'Bangalore 560 {)0 1
I-Ieralth and Famiiy pianning
_ {3(iv;'c:_1i:_1m:fit of Karnataka
"ii-ijt':11:;_3na sjoudha, Bangalore 1
Diixector of Health,
Govezhment of Karnataka
Antanda rao circle, Bangalore
4. President,
Kazmaizaka Medical Ofiices Association
Victoria Hospital
Bangalore
5. Chairman
Indian Medical Council
No.9, Tempic Lane
Kotle Road ‘ ” ‘ ‘
New Delhi 110 911 __ :Respo11tioJ:its
( Smt Niloufer Akbar, AGA for R31 «to R7.3;i ; .A .,
Sri Ravi Vanna Kumar, Senior Advocéttég fc_«~r_ ‘fverxna Kumar
Associates, forR.a4 . = 7 ”
Sri N.Khctty, Advocato..fc:r_R..5 )
Writ petition’ ‘ Iilfid 8a 227 of the
Constitution of India, p»raying to-.direot the jrospondents 1 to 3 to
make necessa1fj*t”E:£1″ofts to; restore thé””medica1 assistance and
service to the patients’ over tho ‘State as it was before etc.,
These Writ “op for pxeiioamaxy hearing this
day, tho Court drziivereci foI1owing:-
V A_ Jfibommxw
« t:j{:)§z1;%;¢r;§;: by P.£}.D1nakara11, co.)
Sinc6.__oommo:t;;:guesfions arise for consideration 1’11 both. the
‘.(2V’£.-it-1€§§,”{‘.1fl€}7 am fiémd together and by consent, they are taken up
:2)””7I’heso public interest litigations are filed seeking
writ: or direction to the State of Karnataka to take
W .
immediate action to put an end to the strike by doctors svorv1V;it1 g*i_n
the government hospitals and to issue a dizection that it
practising medicine cannot go on strike afi’ecting__ftheV gieneraii”
pubiic. The prayers also include seeking dfieceeg :2; tie,
Government and the Ministry of Health :’Fami1y[ to it
take appropriate disciplinary _procee€iit2gs agaiesta
doctors who have acted again”st_ – public
interest and to deal with them, law; to declare
that the stnke called ‘fifiedicai oeieers’
Association, unconstituticzial
and that tl1ey’:’:__I1a\{eA from medical service to
which they have been éiovemment hospital all over
the State; Indian Medicai Cou_nci1~ 55*’-1′
action against the members of the
Association, who have acted iilegaily
T’ Imcofistitutioizaiiy.
Viiifietitioners in these PILS have only vindicated the
of the public at large and particularly that of the common
it V{j2;3ei1’4″e§’Hthe society, who are below the middle class, economically
and downtmeiden, and those who mostly need the medicai
facilities of the Government hospitals. The stiike called
Karnataka Medical Ofiicers’ Association that the ~
doctors propose to go on strike from 1’2.11__.20{)_$ neces’sl:tatedV
petitioners to approach this Court in the al3ovté_”P€3€.s,’lt »t_k1’atj’tot§ if
days after commencement of the strikelV_tJ’3i_tl1e
4) NoI1.nal1y’, this Court jwould the
Press reports; but at the same i’i§fl’filtawj!’. ._proper for this
Court to close the eyes to the Press ané
the media with intetisifying the
strike througl1o11t–. boycotting of emergency
services like (labour), Medico-legal
services etc: the 131 November, 2008.
to our notice that except in teaching
;_._hos§:ite33.,_ medical help and treament across the
hospitals and ¥’rima1y Health Centres that
l tl3leV.l~:’Iealt}3. anti Fmily Welfare Department, sufifezecl.
.§{oWe1;e:%,VVWe_..§lso appreciate that some of the doctors were on duty
.c_a}e of the emergency labour and admizlisfzative sections
1/ help the yoor ageé needy, that too with skeletal strength.
3) If any person of medical profusion
(tioctors on duty) were to resort to such strikes,
demivififi the immediate medical attention A4
treatment to the persons in real need, the
authorities should not hesitate ‘
pxovisions of the Essential Serviees
Act. 1968 if necessary by tereatin£.Ati3.e metiieei 1 ‘
services to the person in vree’i’~~._nee’tV’i to
essential service.” L» t t
{ empha ._sup’f§i£e;§A}Vt” .. __ V , ‘ *~ . . M
1}) Despite ?he’«1_eibove c_1i.€etion°x–:No,3;«we are rather
surprised that” a very lenient View
against the in November, 2008. Of
cauzse, the Goverexjment action under Ruie 10643 of
Kagjnataka R”tde.s__§::y issuing notices to the doctors who
we1:1t:g);£1firo;=,%&A”*§.£).11.2O08 to 13.11.2008 causing much
:;A”‘.i_§e1C(}I1Vt3ilE}f’xf3′,AVi.](3,fJ uf’_i;he’;= fiublic health service which is in clear
vifieletion oft’I.:stajn”£I:3i:hf “‘
pursuance of a strike. We am unable
taken by the Government in this Iegaid, as in g;t;§S;9gzri91ation.M
of the directions of the Qivision Bench iu:sT_s’i’1edV}i1;1 Writ
petition No.-43362/1999 dated ‘:I.$’;3¢.2<.3o5i., I ~ ' "
12) With the “of the same as
hereunder ‘ T . A V. ‘
“…..the 1’-.§ta_!:e #i2atl1.{iri1;ie:>sé:”‘$ho1ild not hesitate to
apply the up:ovisi_6’s;t.;s~_ d=£, t!:;é Essential Services
Maintenance “Act, v1S2_68«,\if’z1uecessary by treating the
V.medic;3gl $e:~vice§ in «person in real need to be an
13)’ §r~;t§ed law that the govemment servants have
. . to go ‘strike ether fundamentally, statutofily or morafiy.
time and again, have declared that the employees
‘A .§:{é1;1*£:_”‘n”G fgmdamental right to resort to strike. There is no statutory
fLpn;;vuision empowefing the employees to_ go 013. strike. The
‘C’t:(VZ!’V’+It3I’I{1I1€Ii’i employees cannot take the society at ransom by going
E1
on striice. Even if there is any injustice to some
(iemocrafic welfare State, the Government doctors _
resort to the machinery provided under various u
nedressal of their grievance. The strike, in .’
misused. which result in n1ai~admi13ist1’a§ion.«V”If’1::ie
society as a whole. £11 a society ecale
unemployment and number eagerly
waiting for employment in the or in the
public sector undeI*ta}.:n::gs: ;* stfiiee jnstified on any
equitable ground.
14) For instead of going on strike,
if the gevennznent sexivants’ £10 eotee more work henestly, diiigently
andi.Ve.fiicienfl§;, Ages_ture”;§eoLdd not only be appreciated by the
autho’z31’ty:V ” at large. The mason being, in a
.r;i em9crae3? they are government empioyees, they are
A ” ~n paxeeief governing body and owe duty to the society
“”-‘:Q.’~.,(‘;iicVie—T¥:§{.R;§.f§A.3ARAJAN vs. GQVERNMENT 012’ TAMILNADU AND
& MR 2003 Sc 3032). of eeuree, in the instant case, few
VVeegcve;enment doctors were sineexeiy working in the hospitals
V§:1enesfly and diligentiy not being influenced by the strike calleé. In
our considered opinion, their sezvices duxing the _
desexves to be appreciated by the Governmextt and u
confidence that the Government woulci aniqounce ‘tad :’V’ .’
doctors who worked during the Ielevazrt atriicetpexixnd.
15) It is neediess to the tiéveitxment
that in Karnataka there is also Kamataka
State Civil Selvices (. 5:5, 1966 which
governs the field, But, we do
net u31derstanc’ivt”ht)x*:I’VAV.t’Vi;”t3: Act had not been
brought to the:”‘.;to’ti:<:e' by the authorities or
overlooked by the Section 3 of the Karnataka
State Qivil (?re§e11ti9;r_.tof Strikes) Act, 1966 which governs
the gates' deVt:§a1*€t§"'£.¥1at no State Civil Servant shall resort to
~16) ob'§ewed by the: Apex Court in the case of AIR 2003
(:nzp:'a)V,"'wh.ateve1' the reason may be, it may not be proper
geȤrern"A'2ne11t servants to resort to stnk' 6, even 'though they
Vt , gefiuxltle and bona fide grievance. That has to be redzessed
'By Iesorting to the mackxinexy prcvided uncier the statutory
powers governing' the government servants, but not a
shake.
1′?) We do acknowledge the seivicieefivoti it
profession as a noble service. Every’ it_3jU.It¢tiA.vC.f€iZ€1}–.’E¥fQ1.3.ght fori
txeatmezit should iIz$tantaneousijg_&’be V¥)Vj]:’CS€I’VC
life and thereafter the allowed to
operate in order to even any
isolated incident hgaé assault on a dector,
such an i1é’v’e~V– been proceeded under
genera} iaiw; V .C311!101T be a gmund for
declaring a publicu” is argued by Szti Ravi Verma
f:§e:-:nio1′ ie£)–‘aii:;:1§_e1¢:’1br the 4*” respondent that same of
the AiI:i_e<:lAic::2'::.i.. jprgtessitixiais were attacked for the lapses committed.
'
V .18) do not contemplate death by negligence.
'at the government hospitals positioned to meet the
is, therefore, duty bound to extend medical
V Vasisiletiaiieei for pieserving life, as observed by the Apex Court in the
"of PLPARAMANANQ KATARA Vs UMON 09' INDIA Arm
5%'?
g’_WWW,,W,,,t
ma %
20) We also Iepose our mnfidence in the .,
keeping in mind the status of the doctors, which ja. M
profession, whether they are employed in Go\}enunei1t
elsewheze, the Government will come a s.o {lufion ”
their reasonable grievances prompigly.
21) With these dixeciions, we..r:.1ose ‘1:§ev£i’fio1:1s.
'i _ :i,__. Vjiusfice
Sd/-2:
Iudgmé
./"
, 4 r
1Hm=:.x- Yz"«;_:/s;_No ~
"W