Delhi High Court
Faisal & Ors. vs Medical Council Of India & Anr. on 3 February, 2009
Author: S.Ravindra Bhat
37
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Pronounced on: 03.02.2009
+ W.P. (C) 461/2009, C.M. 1030/2009
FAISAL & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. P.V. Dinesh, Advocate.
versus
MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Maninder Singh with
Mr. T. Singhdev, Advocate for Resp-1.
Mr. Rakesh Gosain, Advocate for Resp-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers Yes
may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to Reporter or not? Yes
3. Whether the judgment should be Yes
reported in the Digest?
S.RAVINDRA BHAT, J. (ORAL)
% Heard the counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioners seek direction to the second respondent to declare the
result of the screening test held on 28.9.2008 and register them provisionally
as qualified in that process.
3. All the petitioners had claimed to have qualified in foreign medical
courses from Institutions in China. In accordance with the medical eligibility
requirements for taking admission in an under graduate medical course in a
Foreign Medical Regulations, 2002 (hereafter called Regulations), they
sought for and were permitted to appear in the Screening test held by the
second respondent to determine their eligibility for the purpose of
completing their one year rotatory internship. The test was held; however,
their complaint is that till date the respondents have not declared the results
and are relying on some clarifications; the grievance is that the National
Board of Examination (NBE) has indicated that the status quo would be
continued till a final decision is taken by the Central Ministry of Health and
Family Welfare in that regard. The bone of contention appears to be that in
such cases the NBE is insisting upon production of final degree certificate.
4. The petitioners rely upon a letter written to the NBE by the Medical
Council of India (hereafter referred to as MCI) dated 22.12.2008, which is on
record. After considering the purport and effect of the Regulations that letter
records as follows: -
"The above mentioned regulations clearly stipulates that an
Indian citizen possessing a primary medical qualification
awarded by any medical institutions outside India who is
desirous of getting provisional of permanent registration with
the Medical Council of India or any State Medical Council on or
after 15.3.2002 shall have to qualify a screening test conducted
by the prescribed authority for that purpose as per the
provisions of section 13 of the Act and it further clarifies that
after qualifying the Screening Test, the candidate will apply to
the Secretary, MCI or to the State Medical Council for
provisional registration/permanent registration along with the
requisite registration fee and the MCI or the State Medical
Council shall issue provisional registration to such successful
candidates, who are yet to undergo one year internship in an
approved institution.
Accordingly, it is requested that all the students were
similarly placed and who fulfill the minimum eligibility norms
laid down by the Medical Council of India in Graduate Medical
Education Regulations, 1977 and who have passed the MBBS
course may kindly be permitted to appear in the Screening Test
Examination conducted by the National Board of Examination
and declare their result thereof.
I, therefore, request you to kindly release the results of these
Medical Graduates from China Three George University, China,
and after similarly placed candidates and who are otherwise
eligible for admission to medical course to make the successful
candidates eligible to apply for provisional registration to the
Council, so that the Council shall issue provisional registration
to such successful candidates, who are yet to undergo one year
internship in an approved institution."
5. This Court had issued notice and directed the respondents to keep the
necessary records for consideration. Learned counsel for the MCI has
produced the copy of the Minutes of the meeting held between the MCI and
the officials of NBE duly signed by all participants in the meeting including
the representatives of the NBE. They record that:
"after due deliberations, it was agreed upon that the
students of such institutes as are covered u/s 12 and
who have gone abroad prior to the date of order of the
Hon'ble Delhi High Court dated 26.9.2008 may also be
allowed to appear in the Screening Test provided they
fulfill the Minimum Eligibility norms as prescribed by
the Council and the results may be declared thereof
without insistence of eligibility certificate".
6. It was also noted earlier:
"After due discussion, it was also agreed upon that it is
desirable those students who are in possession of
provisional pass certificate from abroad should also be
allowed to appear in the screening test and the result
declared thereof.
7. Learned counsel for the NBE contended that on the said date, i.e.,
2.2.2009, a letter was written to the MCI suggesting corrections in the above
two decisions and making it subject to the prior approval and consent of the
Government of India.
8. This Court has considered the matter. The inaction of the NBE, in the
circumstances of this case, is not only strange but to a large extent
inexplicable. The NBE has, nowhere, till date urged as to whether reference
has been made to the Central Government for clarifications in terms of the
Notice put on its website on 10.10.2008. Learned counsel for the MCI
pointed out that the requirements of the Regulations would be satisfied if the
candidate produces a provisional certificate to enable him to complete his
internship and that in such terms, he can be permitted to complete the
internship provided he qualifies the screening test. The position of the NBE
which merely conducts the examination is to neither take a formal decision
or making a positive recommendation nor state that those who appeared in
the examination like the petitioners are ineligible.
9. Having regard to the stand of the MCI and the Regulations, the Court is
of the considered opinion at this stage that the petitioners' result should be
declared. The NBE should take appropriate steps and do so within a week.
10. Learned counsel for the NBE assures that the results would be declared
within two days.
11. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of.
S. RAVINDRA BHAT
(JUDGE)
FEBRUARY 03, 2009
/vd/
