The Court remarked that the candidate could not be subjected to harassment merely due to technical reasons, particularly when the documents were admittedly in the custody of the concerned authorities.
The Court observed:
"It goes without saying that the original documents are in possession with the respondent No.2 i.e. Director, Medical Education. The respondent No.2 was required to return the original documents and when he was aware that the original documents are in his possession and due to simple technicalities, the petitioner could not have been harassed and put to hardship by filing the present contempt petition".
Background of the Case
The matter involved an MBBS graduate from the Scheduled Tribe category who appeared for the NEET PG 2020 examination and secured an All India Rank of 79,171. He was allotted a seat at a Government Medical College in the second counselling round and commenced his postgraduate studies in July 2020.
However, he later discontinued the PG programme, reportedly citing ragging, nepotism, and favouritism as the reasons. Following his withdrawal, the institution retained his original documents and demanded ₹30 lakh under the State quota bond policy.
Petitioner's Arguments
Challenging the college’s decision, the petitioner’s counsel argued that the hefty bond amount was unreasonable, especially given that numerous postgraduate seats remain unfilled. Reference was also made to proceedings in the Lok Sabha dated February 9, 2024, where the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare informed that the National Medical Commission had advised states to reconsider and review strict bond policies.
Medical Officer Appointment and Urgency
According to the petition, the candidate had successfully qualified for the post of Medical Officer pursuant to an advertisement issued on August 8, 2024 by the MP Public Service Commission. He received acknowledgement on January 20, 2026, and was scheduled to attend an interview on March 5, 2026. The submission of required documents under the advertisement was compulsory by February 23, 2026.
In the related proceedings, the High Court had earlier granted interim relief by directing the respondents to release the original certificates.
Contempt Petition and Court’s Direction
Subsequently, the petitioner moved a contempt plea, alleging deliberate non-compliance with the Court’s earlier directive.
Taking note of the circumstances, the Bench ordered:
"It is directed that the respondent No.2 who is the contemnor in the present contempt petition i.e. Director, Medical Education is hereby directed to return the original documents by latest 02nd March, 2026 to avoid any further contempt proceedings to be initiated by this Court".
The matter has been listed for further hearing on March 9, 2026.