In Brief
Medical aspirants challenged compulsory service bonds imposed by States as a condition for admission to post-graduate and super-specialty medical courses. They contended the bonds violated fundamental rights and various laws. The Supreme Court upheld the bonds as valid, holding that State Governments have competence to impose them under Article 162. The Court found no violation of Articles 14, 19, 21, or 23, and determined the bonds do not violate the Indian Contract Act or Specific Relief Act. The Court emphasized the State's constitutional duty to provide healthcare to deprived sections of society outweighs individual career choice, and compulsory service for public purposes is expressly permitted. However, the Court suggested service periods be reasonable (2 years) with proportionate exit clauses (Rs. 20 Lakhs).
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.