Archive · 31 Jul 2025
High Court Upholds Jurisdiction in Junior Doctor Posting Dispute
Some junior doctors had problems with where the government told them to work.
They went to court to complain.
The government said the court shouldn't hear their complaints.
The court looked at the rules and said, "Yes, we can hear their case."
The judge said the doctors weren't really hired for jobs, but were assigned to help the state.
The doctors felt the government was punishing them for speaking up.
The court's decision means they can continue with their complaints.
High Court asserts jurisdiction over junior doctors' posting petitions.
State government contested the petitions, arguing for State Administrative Tribunal.
Justice Basu ruled junior doctors were 'deployed,' not 'employed,' by the state.
Doctors challenged postings as vindictive, alleging they didn't match choices.
The court's decision supports doctors' position against the state's tactics.
- Who
- Junior doctors and the state government
- What
- The High Court decided it has the authority to hear petitions from junior doctors disputing their postings by the state.
- When
- Wednesday
- Where
- High Court
- Why
- The junior doctors believed their postings were retaliatory.
Junior Doctors' Perspective
State Government's Perspective
Posting Locations
Junior Doctors' Perspective
Junior doctors claim their postings were a result of their leading the RG Kar protests.
State Government's Perspective
The state government claims that doctors should have taken their issues to the State Administrative Tribunal.
- Court
- High Court
- Doctors
- Aniket Mahata, Asfakulla Naiya, Debashis Halder
- Government
- State government
- Doctors' Complaint
- Posting locations
- Legal Issue
- Court jurisdiction