JUDGMENT Dr. S. Muralidhar, J. (Open Court)-A judgment was passed by a Division Bench of this Court on 20.5.2002 in WP(C) 5166/2001 (Court on its own motion V. All India Institute of Medical Sciences) whereby a Code of Conduct was put in place by this Court which was made applicable not only to all the employees of AIIMS but also to the Staff and Faculty members. The Code of Conduct, il1ter alia, provides that there should be no cessation of work for any reason whatsoever or the aiding, or allotting of such disruption or cessation. A series of other prohibitions were also prescribed. The overriding need for such a Code was expressed thus: "We are conscious of the fact that employees ordinarily also have a right to agitate their grievances by way of peaceful action including collective bargaining and collective action. However, considering the special circumstances of the AIIMS as an Institution and particularly the sensitive nature of such a super specialty referral hospital requiring the uninterrupted and smooth functioning of each and every sphere of activity as also the space and locational constraints such as ICU /Emergency /Trauma Centre being all located close to the entrance and exist areas, and also Blood Bank facilities, life-saving medicines and devices being required at short notice, as well as unimpeded movement of medical and para-medical personnel having to be ensured at all times, it would be appropriate and in the interest of justice and also in public interest, that there should be no activity in the nature of strike, dharna or demonstration or gherao at, or in, or around the AIIMS at all" 2. The complaint in this contempt petition is that notwithstanding the above Code of Conduct, an incident took place on 24.11.2004 which led to the Karamcharis agitating and disrupting the work for three days thereafter. 3. It is pointed out by the Counsel for the respondent Karamchari Union that soon after this incident, on 29.11.2004, when a Division Bench of this Court was hearing another Writ Petition (C) No. 18384/2004, S.P. Sampath Kumarv. AIIMS, the office bearers of the Karamchari Union were present in the Court and gave a solemn undertaking to this Court which has been recorded in the order passed by the Division Bench on 29.11.2004 as under: "On behalf of the AIIMS Karamdoari Union, its President Mr. Sat Prakash, Vice-President, Mr. AIIMS, the office bearers of the Karamchari Union were present in the Court and gave a solemn undertaking to this Court which has been recorded in the order passed by the Division Bench on 29.11.2004 as under: "On behalf of the AIIMS Karamdoari Union, its President Mr. Sat Prakash, Vice-President, Mr. Arjun Singh Rawat, General Secretary, Mr. Ramesh and Joint Secretary, Mr. Vijay Kumar are present before Court and they have given a solemn assurance to this Court that they are working as usual and they shall not resort to any strike or disrupt the administration directly or indirectly. It will be open to the Karamchari Union to make representation to the appropriate authority in respect of their recent grievances. However, at the same time we repeat that the services should not be disrupted and no patient should suffer on this count. In view of the solemn assurance given to the Court by the aforesaid office bearers of the Karamchari Union, we are not required to entertain the writ petition any further at this stage. Hence the writ Petition and CM 13883/2004 are accordingly disposed of." 4. Mr. Sudhir Nandarajog, learned Counsel for the respondent Karamchari Union states that the Karamchari Union and its office bearers stand by the solemn undertaking given to this Court on 29.11.2004 and will continue to abide by that undertaking. In response to a query by the Court whether there has been any incident after 29.11.2004 in violation of the said undertaking, Counsel for the petitioner referred to an incident of 2.12.2004 in respect of which the second contempt i.e. CCP 809/2004 has been filed. 5. That incident of 2.12.2004 involved workers of the Karamchari Union of AIMMS agitating their grievance outside the Directors office. There are two versions of these incidents. The petitioner maintains that the workers had physically prevented the Director from attending his duties in the ICU thus putting the patients at grave risk to their health and safety, whereas the version of the Karamchari Union is that they had met the Director to give a representation when their attempts of seeking a prior appointment with him were unsuccessful. It also appears that arising out of this incident, proceedings have been initiated against the Karamcharis involved in this incident. 6. It also appears that arising out of this incident, proceedings have been initiated against the Karamcharis involved in this incident. 6. To this Court, it appears that the solitary incident of 2004 should be viewed in the perspective of it being a solitary instance in respect of which separate proceedings appeared to have been initiated against the workers disciplinarily. It has not had the effect of bringing the entire work in the institution to a halt as was apprehended when the judgment dated 20.5.2002 was passed. This Court is of the considered view that this contempt petition need not be further pursued as far as this incident is concerned. 7. Having said this, this Court would nevertheless like to reiterate that the Code of Conduct approved by this Court on 20.5.2002 should be observed not only by the Karamcharis but all the medical practitioners and :her staff of AIIMS as well. The recent instances which witnessed medical practitioners ceasing to work for days on end, thereby denying emergency and other critical care to patients gives cause for considerable concern that the judgment dated 20.5.2002 of this Court is being observed in the breach. The Court is informed that there is another writ petition pending in this Court on the issue of strikes by doctors. However it is clear that the earlier judgment dated 20.5.2002 has neither been stayed by the Honble Supreme Court nor has it been modified. 8. Accordingly, the course of action that commends itself to this Court is to bind the respondent Karamchari Union representatives to the undertaking already given by them to this Court on 29.11.2004 which is once again confirmed by Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, Advocate appearing on their behalf. A direction is also issued to AIIMS to give fresh publicity to the order dated 20.5.2002 and in particular, the Code of Conduct in its entirety. It should be prominently displayed not only in the AIIMS campus but copies be sent to Associations of Doctors and of the various categories of staff who are working at the AIIMS. The Medical Council of India will also be sent a copy of the judgment dated 20.5.2002 by the AIIMS within a period of two weeks. 9. With the above directions, the contempt petitions are disposed of. Order be given dasti. 10. The Medical Council of India will also be sent a copy of the judgment dated 20.5.2002 by the AIIMS within a period of two weeks. 9. With the above directions, the contempt petitions are disposed of. Order be given dasti. 10. A certified copy of the Order dated 20.5.2002 in W.P.(C) No. 5166/ 2001 and of this Order be sent by the Registry, by special messenger, within three days to the Union Health Secretary, the Director, AIIMS and the Medical Council of India. Contempt Petitions disposed of.