The Jharkhand Health Department has initiated proceedings that could lead to the termination of 631 government doctors accused of failing to join their assigned posts or remaining absent from duty for prolonged periods.
The action follows a review that identified 695 doctors appointed through the Jharkhand Public Service Commission (JPSC) between 1988 and 2023. The 631 doctors have been asked to provide proof of their current service status within 15 days, while another 64 have been asked to explain their alleged unauthorised absence.
Health Minister Irfan Ansari said action would follow service rules, with the government aiming to fill vacant posts and improve patient access to care. However, some doctors have questioned their inclusion in the list, saying they have departmental permission to pursue higher studies or have already resumed duty. The department’s review of individual cases will be crucial before any final decisions are made.
Service Records Under Review
The cases came to light when the Health Department reviewed its seniority records and sought district-wise reports on doctors’ service status.
According to the department’s findings, the largest group of cases involved the 2009 recruitment batch, with 308 doctors reportedly found to have either not joined their assigned workplaces or remained absent after appointment.
The government has asked the 631 doctors to establish that they are still in service within the stipulated 15-day period. The remaining 64 have been asked to explain why disciplinary action should not be taken against them for allegedly remaining absent without authorisation. Officials have indicated that further action will depend on the documents submitted and the explanations received.
The proposed terminations will also require the applicable administrative clearances, including JPSC approval and state Cabinet approval wherever necessary. The proceedings are therefore not equivalent to a final dismissal order against all 631 doctors. The department’s immediate task is to determine which positions are genuinely vacant and which cases require further examination.
Doctors Question Inclusion
The move has prompted questions about the accuracy of the department’s records. In a report published on October 28, Dainik Jagran reported that some doctors on the list claimed they had received no-objection certificates (NOCs) or permission for postgraduate and super-speciality studies.
Others said they had resigned or returned to duty but were still listed as absent. The doctors have called for their appointment records, study leave, departmental permissions and current service status to be checked before any final decision is taken. These claims have not been independently established for every individual case, making verification essential.
The government, meanwhile, maintains that doctors who fail to join their assigned posts or remain absent without valid reasons must face action under the rules. Health Minister Irfan Ansari has described such absence as a serious matter, stressing that doctors have a crucial role in the public healthcare system.
He has said the government intends to fill vacant positions promptly so that patients are not inconvenienced. The contrasting concerns underline the need to distinguish unauthorised absence from legitimate leave or errors in service records.
The latest action follows earlier disciplinary measures. In 2025, Jharkhand terminated the services of 86 medical officers and 57 specialist doctors who reportedly failed to join their assigned posts after recruitment. The current exercise is also intended to clear long-standing discrepancies and enable fresh recruitment through the JPSC once positions are formally vacated.
However, removing doctors from government records will not automatically resolve staffing gaps. Recruitment, deployment and the willingness of medical professionals to serve in particular locations will also influence whether public hospitals and health centres can provide reliable care.
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
Accountability is essential when public appointments remain unfulfilled, particularly in a state where people depend on government facilities for timely and affordable treatment.
A medical post that exists only on paper cannot serve a patient waiting for a consultation, and prolonged unauthorised absence must be addressed fairly and firmly. At the same time, disciplinary action should rest on accurate records, transparent procedures and an opportunity for every doctor to present valid evidence.
Those who have failed to fulfil their responsibilities should be held accountable, but those who have followed authorised arrangements must not be penalised because of administrative oversights. Ultimately, this exercise should be judged not by how many names are removed from a list, but by whether more doctors become available to patients, including those in underserved areas. How can Jharkhand ensure accountability among government doctors while making public healthcare more accessible and fair for everyone?
Also Read: Abhijeet Dipke’s CJP Backs INDIA Bloc’s November 1 Rally, Renews Demand For Gyanesh Kumar’s Removal
