Advocate General, that they have no justification on facts either. Almost all the justifications in the counter affidavit are an afterthought, as it will appear from the Strike notice dated 27th September, 2014 wherein they do not find place. Their complaint with regard to infrastructural facilities, recruitment of the doctors in the hospitals are not their concern qua Doctors. It could be a public problem for which a remedy is available at the instance of the public. They are duty bound to work with the infrastructure available. They may point out these problems to the Government for which they cannot adopt obstructive measure for remedy, let alone, resort to strike. In case of failure on the part of the Government, they may approach, in a fit case, the appropriate court as law abiding citizens. It appears that in the said strike notice, the Demand Nos.3, 4 & 5 are justified as they are relatable to their engagement. It appears from the counter-affidavit filed by the Government and the assurance by the learned Advocate General, orally in Court, that appropriate measures have been taken to meet these demands. In fact, a sum of Rs.3.00 Crores has been released by a Government Order which would be spent to solve their problems as indicated in the counter-affidavit of the 9th respondent. Therefore, we are of the view that the junior doctors, in particular, members of the 9th respondent, factually at present do not have any justification to resort to strike. It appears, as rightly pointed out by the petitioner and the learned Advocate General, that the Government Orders have been issued prohibiting strikes by junior doctors and, as a matter of fact on 17.9.2014, the services of the junior doctors was declared to be essential and as such resorting to dharna/strike within the college and hospital premises is not legally permissible.
