Chandigarh: Chandigarh administration’s move to establish a cadre structure for Group A general duty medical officers in its health department has met with opposition from Punjab govt doctors’ body, which has objected to what it describes as a departure from a long-standing inter-state deputation arrangement between Punjab and Haryana.The administration recently notified the UT Chandigarh Health Service Rules, 2026, establishing the cadre structure, recruitment procedures and service conditions for the Group A officers. The rules provide for 186 sanctioned posts, including medical officer, senior medical officer and chief medical officer.Chandigarh’s health system, in the past, relied largely on doctors and specialists deputed from Punjab and Haryana health services, along with other regional or central arrangements. Hospitals such as GMSH-16 and civil dispensaries were staffed through these arrangements rather than through a separate, formally established local medical cadre.Punjab Civil Medical Services Association (PCMSA), representing govt doctors and state-cadre deputationists serving in Chandigarh, has strongly objected to the rules, saying the proposed framework would affect existing arrangements governing the deputation of Punjab-cadre medical officers to Chandigarh.One of its principal objections is what the association describes as a violation of the historic 60:40 inter-state deputation framework. It held the introduction of a dedicated local sub-cadre with a 40% direct recruitment pool and generalised deputation routes would bypass the 60:40 administrative-sharing arrangement between Punjab and Haryana, which it links to the historical framework of Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966.The association has also argued that state-cadre medical officers, including PCMS deputationists, have contributed to strengthening healthcare services in Chandigarh through their experience in state health services. According to PCMSA, creating a parallel local sub-cadre would undermine these deputation arrangements, affect career expectations and create disparities among doctors working in the same hospitals under different rules.The association argued that the existing UT-borne cadre lacked sufficient specialist depth to run secondary-care facilities such as GMSH-16 without support from parent states.PCMSA has also challenged what it calls the “shortage of deputationists” justification for the proposed changes.According to the association, any shortage of deputationists or reliance on contractual personnel is the result of delayed requisitions, administrative issues, alleged harassment of deputationists and cumbersome bureaucratic channels between UT and parent states, rather than a problem with the 60:40 framework. The association argued that short-term administrative or contractual gaps cannot be used as a legal or logical basis to dismantle statutory deputation structures.PCMSA has also raised concerns over what it described as the denial of allowances and other financial benefits to deputationists performing risk-intensive clinical duties. It alleged that essential health allowances, including HPCA/PCA, standard deputation allowances and higher education allowances of 12% to 15% for PG/Diploma qualifications, have been denied.Another major objection raised by PCMSA relates to regularised contractual medical officers. It claims that granting full centralised UT medical cadre status, retrospective seniority, dynamic assured career progression (DACP) and promotional avenues to contractual medical officers regularised through judicial interventions, including the case cited as Chandigarh Administration vs Anjali Gupta, created an administrative and legal anomaly.PCMSA has also questioned the selection process of these regularised personnel. It claimed they were initially selected through local departmental committees in the late 1990s and early 2000s and alleged that they did not undergo the constitutional vetting and merit-based selection process of Union Public Service Commission (UPSC).PCMSA president Dr Akhil Sarin said they have written to UT health secretary and urged Chandigarh administration to withhold the rules and preserve the 60:40 inter-state deputation framework. “The association has also demanded restoration of what it describes as withheld allowances and increments, clearance of pending 5/10/15-year MACP cases and removal of what it terms the ‘pay-scale forfeiture’ threat,” he said.Dr Sarin has also sought the reclassification of regularised contractual personnel into an “ex-cadre or supernumerary” category rather than placing them within the sanctioned cadre strength in a manner that could affect the promotional pathways of regular UPSC-vetted and state-deputation officers.Despite repeated attempts, UT home-cum-health secretary Mandip Singh Brar was not available for comments.KEY CONCERNSAlleged violation of the historic 60:40 inter-state deputation frameworkDispute over the “shortage of deputationists” justificationAlleged administrative harassment and denial of financial benefitsObjection to absorption and cadre parity for regularised contractual MOs
