Chattisgarh High Court
Manish Raj vs Union Of India on 10 November, 2021
1
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
W.P.(C) No. 2532 of 2018
Manish Raj S/o Chouth Lal Daharia Aged About 23 Years R/o Panna Nagar,
Jarhabhata, Tahsil And District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. Union Of India Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Health, New Delhi., District : New
Delhi, Delhi
2. The National Board Of Examination Through Its Director, New Delhi., District : New
Delhi, Delhi
3. Medical Council Of India Through Its Secretary, Pocket 14, Sector-8 Dwarika, New
Delhi., District : New Delhi, Delhi
4. The Section Officer Meddical Council Of India, Pocket 14, Sector-8 Dwarika Phase-I,
New Delhi., District : New Delhi, Delhi
---- Respondents
10/11/2021 Shri Kishore Bhaduri, Senior Advocate with Shri Sabyasachi Bhaduri
and Shri Pankay Singh, Advocates for the petitioner.
Shri Tushar Dhar Diwan, Advocate on behalf of Assistant Solicitor
General for Union of India.
Shri Ranbir Singh Marhas and Shri Aman Tamboli, Advocates for
respondents No.3 & 4.
Heard on I.A. No. 1 of 2021, an application for urgent hearing of this
case.
It is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner
completed his Higher Secondary Education in the year 2012. The
petitioner applied for permission to respondent No.3 - Medical Council of
India on 30.11.2012 for issuance of eligibility certificate as it was required
under Section 13 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956. No timely
decision was taken in the application by respondent No.3, therefore, the
petitioner took admission in the Medical College at Ukraine and completed
the course in the year 2018. The application of the petitioner preferred by
respondent No.3 was pending since 30.11.2012, which was dismissed by
respondent No.4 taking the ground that the petitioner had taken admission
in MBBS Course in the year 2012 at the time when he had not completed
the age of 17 years vide order dated 6.11.2016 (Annexure-P/1).
Reliance has been placed on the judgment in the case of
Jishalakshi Embrandiri and Others vs. Medical Council of India and
Ors., reported in 2006 SCC OnLine Del 1659, in which the petition was
filed under similar circumstances.
Reliance has also been placed on the judgment of Supreme Court in
the case of Medical Council of India vs. Indian Doctors from Russia
Welfare Association and Ors. reported in (2002) 3 SCC 696. In the
recent development, respondent No.2 has issued a notification dated
23.7.2021. The petitioner is unable to appear in the said examination as he
does not possess the eligibility certificate, therefore, the petition may either
be disposed off with a direction to the respondents or any interim relief be
granted to the petitioner to appear in the examination for foreign medical
graduates on interim basis.
Learned counsel for respondents No.1 & 2 opposes the submissions
made in this respect.
Learned counsel for respondent No.3 opposes the submissions and
submits that the petitioner has no entitlement either for grant of eligibility
certificate or grant of interim relief to appear in the upcoming examination.
It is submitted that the MCI is the situated authority created on the Indian
Medical Council Act, 1956. The minimum age prescribed for taking
admission in MBBS Course is 17 years and the same is applicable for
admission in the medical colleges within the country and abroad, therefore,
the dismissal of the application for grant of eligibility certificate in favour of
the petitioner is a proper and lawful order.
The Supreme Court has held in the case of State of Kerala vs. T.P.
Roshna, reported in (1979) SCC 580 that Medical Council of India has
implicit power to supervise the qualifications or eligibility standards for
admission into medical institutions. It has been similarly held in the case of
MCI vs. State of Karnataka, reported in (1998) 6 SCC 131 and in the case
of Dr. Preeti Srivastava vs. State of M.P. & Ors., reported in (1999) 7
SCC 120, therefore, fulfillment of minimum qualification is must. Hence,
the present petition is not fit to be admitted, which may be dismissed and
disposed off.
Considered on the submissions. Perused all the documents
attached with the petition. Clause IV of the Graduate Medical Education
Regulations, 1997 is reproduced as under:
'Admission, Selection, Migration & Training:-
4. Admission to the Medical Course - Eligibility Criteria:
No Candidate shall be allowed to be admitted to the
Medical Curriculum proper of first Bachelor of Medicine
and Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) Course until:
(1) He/ she shall complete the age of 17 years on or
before 31st December of the year of admission to the
MBBS Course;'
After taking into consideration the judgment of Delhi High Court in
the case of Jishalakshi Embrandiri and Others (surpa) and the judgment
of Supreme Court in the case of MCI vs. Indian Doctors From Russia
Welfare Association and Others (supra), the prayer for interim relief is
allowed.
The respondents are directed to permit the petitioner to appear in the
screening examination for foreign medical graduates notified by respondent
No.2 - National Board of Examination on interim basis.
The result of the petitioner shall be kept in a sealed cover which can
be opened and referred to only after the present petition is finally disposed
off.
Respondents No.1 & 2 have not filed any response to the petition,
therefore, they are granted time to file response.
List this case after four weeks.
Sd/-
(Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant)
Judge
Nimmi
