Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 18
CASE NO.:
Writ Petition (civil) 604 of 2002
PETITIONER:
Sanjeev Gupta & Ors.
RESPONDENT:
Union of India & Anr.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 16/11/2004
BENCH:
CJI., ASHOK BHAN & G.P. MATHUR
JUDGMENT:
J U D G M E N T
WITH
W. P. (C) No. 616/ 2002,
Akannsha Singh & Ors.
Vs.
Union of India & Anr.
W. P. (C) No. 634/2002,
Anoop Nambiar & Ors.
Vs.
Union of India & Ors.
W. P. (C) No. 22/2003
Sudharsan Sornam & Ors.
Vs.
Union of India & Ors.
W. P. (C) No. 11/2003
Azaj Ahmed Malik
Vs.
Medical Council of India
W. P. (C) No. 14/2003
Sushim Mathur & Ors.
Vs.
Union of India & Anr.
W. P. (C) No. 16/2003
Arun Sreedhar & Ors.
Vs.
Union of India & Ors.
W. P. (C) No. 26/2003
Sonia Chadha & Ors.
Vs.
Union of India & Ors.
W. P. (C) No.25/2003
Raja Shekhar & Ors.
Vs.
Union of India & Anr.
W. P. (C) No.27/2003
Aman Pal Singh & Ors.
Vs.
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 18
Union of India & Anr.
W. P. (C) No.33/2003
Sachin Grover & Ors.
Vs.
Union of India & Anr.
W. P. (C) No.34/2003
Ashik Keereerakath & Anr.
Vs.
Union of India & Ors.
W. P. (C) No.391/2003
J. Muthuvel
Vs.
Union of India & Ors.
W. P. (C) No.404/2003,
Nimai Chandra Jena
Vs.
Union of India & Anr.
W. P. (C) No.488/2003,
Anup Ranjan Dey Sarkar & Anr.
Vs.
Union of India & Anr.
W. P. (C) No.185/2004,
Varun Mittal
Vs.
Union of India & Anr.
W. P. (C) No.184/2004
Vipul Mittal
Vs.
Union of India & Anr.
W. P. (C) No.166/2004
Gagan Sethi
Vs.
Union of India & Anr.
W. P. (C) No.190/2004
Manjusha Varghese
Vs.
Union of India & Ors.
W. P. (C) No.172/2004
Gaurav Sagar
Vs.
Union of India & Anr.
SLP [C] ..../2004 CC. No.2256-2258
Anand Kumar Singh & Ors.
Vs.
Union of India & Ors.
I.A. No. of 2004
In W.P. ) No. 604 of 2002
BHAN, J.
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 18
Delay condoned. Leave granted in SLP(C)......of 2004 CC No.
2256-2258.
Interlocutory application in WP (C) No. 604 of 2002 is allowed.
As the points of law involved in all these cases are the same or
similar with little variations which would be indicated in the later part of
the judgment, this judgment shall dispose of all the above-mentioned
cases by a common judgment.
Writ Petition (C) No. 604 of 2002, WP(C) No. 25 of 2003 and
WP(C) No. 33 of 2003 pertain to the batch of students who joined the
course in 1994 whereas the WP(C) No. 616 of 2002, WP(C) No. 634
of 2002, WP(C) No. 11 of 2003, WP(C) No. 14 of 2003, WP(C) No. 16
of 2003, WP(C) No. 26 of 2003, WP(C) No. 25 of 2003, WP(C) No. 27
of 2003, WP(C) No. 34 of 2003, WP(C) No. 404 of 2003, C.A. No.
of 2004 (arising out of SLP (C) No. ...... of 2004/CC No. 2256-2258)
and IA ....... of 2004 pertain to the students who joined the course in
the year 1995; WP(C) No. 391 of 2003, WP(C) No. 488 of 2003 and
WP(C) No. 190 of 2004 pertain to the students who joined the course
in 1996; WP(C) No. 185 of 2004 and WP(C) No. 172 of 2004 pertain to
the students who joined the course in 1999, WP(C) No. 166 of 2004
pertains to the students who joined the course in 2000 and WP(C) No.
22 of 2003, year of joining the course was not mentioned.
Before adverting to the facts of the present cases and the points
involved, it would be necessary to state the background facts leading
to filing of the present petitions.
BACKGROUND FACTS:
In the year 1981 Government of India requested the Medical
Council of India (for short "MCI") for consideration of grant of
recognition for medical courses in medical institutions in the erstwhile
States of USSR. MCI gathered the information that the graduate
medicine courses in these institutions is of six years after one year of
the language training. Thereafter, the candidates are required to
undertake mandatory internship of 12 months. Section 13 (3) of the
Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (hereinafter, ’the Act’ for short) also
stipulates undergoing one-year internship after obtaining the medical
qualifications. Section 12 of the Act provides that the MCI can grant
recognition of medical qualifications to the medical institutions in
various countries with which there is a scheme of reciprocity. After
considering the report received from the MCI Government of India in
1986 recognised certain institutions in the erstwhile States of USSR.
Such institutions were put in the Second Schedule of the Act.
After the disintegration of USSR, serious aberrations in the
system of recruitment and admission of students in institutions located
in Russia and CIS countries were reported by the Indian Embassies at
Moscow & Almaty in the early part of the year 1994. Various private
agencies with dubious antecedents mushroomed and sponsored
medical candidates for commercial gains. A perceptible decline in the
standards of medical education in these countries was also noticed. In
the backdrop of communications received from the Indian Embassies,
the Government of India was concerned that if the situation is allowed
to continue, a large number of Indian students would end up in medical
institutions with doubtful standards. Government of India sought the
comments of MCI as to whether the recognition of these institutions
could be continued in view of the communications received from the
Indian Embassies at Moscow & Almaty. MCI sent its comments to the
Central Government on 1.11.1994 recommending de-recognition of all
medical degrees of the erstwhile USSR included in the Second
Schedule of the Act.
In these circumstances, Government of India in March 1995
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 18
issued an advertisement in the newspapers informing the general
public that no private agency had been authorised by the Government
of India to select students for admission in under graduate and post
graduate medical courses in Russia and other CIS countries and
informing the students taking admission in medical courses through
such private agencies that they would be doing so at their own risk and
Government of India would not be responsible for any consequences
in respect of the students joining such medical courses in those
countries.
In the year 1996, the Counsellor (Education) in the Embassy of
India at Moscow brought to the notice of MCI and the Ministry of
Human Resource Development that the Russian Ministry of Health
had continued to give admission to students sponsored through private
agencies in India. He also reported that there was a decline in the
academic standards of Russian educational institutions and manifest
erosion of ethics which made it impossible to be sure that undeserving
students would not complete their medical education from these
institutions. The calibre of the Indian students studying there had also
sharply deteriorated. The Counsellor further informed that though
earlier, Indian students were known for their high academic
performance, unfortunately that was not the case any more.
MCI also gathered information that many Indian students who
were not eligible for admission to medical degree courses had secured
admission in Russian medical institutes. Some of these students had
secured less than 50% marks in the 10+2 examination and many had
not studied Biology as a subject in school. Besides, there were
number of students who initially took admission in institutes not
recognised by the MCI and after doing part of their studies in such
institutes, subsequently migrated to recognised institutes. There was
another category of students who came back to India with medical
degrees after undergoing the course with less than the prescribed six
years of studies in medicine.
In August 1997 the MCI issued an advertisement in the
newspapers warning the students against taking admission in medical
courses in the countries of former USSR through private agencies and
informing them that they shall be doing so entirely on their own risk. It
was further informed that the matter of recognition of degrees granted
by the 29 medical institutions in the countries of the former USSR was
currently under review and that the MCI would not be granting
recognition to students who obtained admission in these institutes on
their own without awaiting the decision with regard to the recognition
status of these institutes. It was also informed that such students
would not be eligible to practice medicine in India. The Executive
Committee of MCI in discharge of its statutory duty on 17.9.1997 took
the decisions mentioned in the following paragraph in respect of the
students coming back from various medical institutions from the
erstwhile States of USSR and seeking registration under the
provisions of the Act, when such students either did not have 50%
marks in 10+2 or did not have biology as one of the subjects or got
admitted in unrecognised medical institutions or were getting the
degrees in medicine without undergoing the complete duration of the
medicine course and had got admission through private agencies:-
"a) The students who complete their medical degree
course of less than 6 years duration from
institutions in erstwhile USSR shall not be eligible
for registration because of the fact that the
duration of M.D. (Physician) course is 6 years,
after one year preparatory/language course.
(b) The students completing successfully total six
years clinical M.D. (Physician) course in an MCI
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 18
recognised institute i.e., obtaining recognised
M.D. (Physician) degree on or after 1/7/97 shall
have to undergo one year internship after
obtaining the qualification. Such candidates only
shall be eligible for permanent registration u/s
13(3) of the M.C.I. Act, 1956 provided they meet
the other criteria of the Council laid down with
regard to admission for undergraduate medical
course.
(c) The students who were initially admitted in an
institution not recognised by the MCI and later on
migrated and obtained the degree from
recognised medical institutions in erstwhile USSR
will not be eligible for any kind of registration in
India."
The decision of the Executive Committee of the MCI was
approved by the General Body of the MCI.
After carefully considering all the relevant factors, in a meeting
held on 6.11.1998 presided over by the Principal Secretary to the
Prime Minister of India and attended by the Foreign Secretary, Health
secretary, Secretary, MCI and other senior officers of Ministry of
external Affairs and the Prime Minister’s Office, the following decisions
were arrived at:
"1. There will be no change in the status of the
two institutions namely Daghestan State
Medical Institute, Russia and Azerbaijan
Medical Institute in Azerbaijan which were
already de-recognised in March, 1998.
2. Instead of going in for de-recognition of the
other medical institutions in the erstwhile
USSR, a system of post-screening of the
students who are coming back to India after
obtaining the degree from these institutions
can be introduced straightway. This can be
made applicable to all the students who return
to India after obtaining medical degrees from
any foreign medical institution.
3. A system of pre-screening of the students
desirous of taking admission in the medical
institutions in these countries shall also be
worked out by MCI. This can be introduced
from the forthcoming academic year.
4. The MCI and the Department of Health will
work out technical details for introducing the
pre-screening and post-screening processes
suggested above."
As pointed out earlier, after disintegration of USSR admissions of
students ran into difficulties for either not having studied in recognised
colleges or partly in recognised and partly in non-recognised colleges
or they had not completed their courses in full. MCI entertained
serious doubts as to the genuineness of some of the courses
undergone by various students, thus leading to difficulties on the
question of recognising their degrees and their registration as medical
practitioners. Writ petitions were filed in different High Courts by
persons [mostly by 1997-98 batch pass-outs] who had undergone
courses in medicine in medical colleges in the erstwhile USSR.
MCI took the stand that when initial admission of the students in the
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 18
non-recognised institution could not be accepted, their transfer to
recognised colleges subsequently could not be of any benefit to them.
MCI also passed various types of orders either during the pendency of
the proceedings before the courts or otherwise in relation to
recognition of the degrees or registration of such persons as
practitioners. Delhi High Court allowed the writ petitions and granted
relief to the doctors concerned. Allahabad High Court also granted
interim order. Aggrieved against the orders passed by the High
Courts, MCI filed appeals in this Court. During the course of hearing
of the appeals certain suggestions were made and the Solicitor
General of India who was appearing for the MCI was requested to
seek instructions from MCI with a view to mitigate the hardship being
faced by the graduates of medical schools/colleges, Russia. In
response to the aforesaid the General Body of the MCI met on
31.3.2000 and resolved as follows:
"The Executive Committee in order to remedy the
various problems which have arisen on account of the
break-up of Soviet Union, as a one time measure
decided to place the following possible solutions for
consideration by the Hon’ble Supreme Court :-
i) In the view of the Medical Council any student
who has obtained less than 50% marks in
Physics, Chemistry & Biology in the 10+2
examination would not at all be eligible for
registration. This in the considered view of the
Council is an absolute imperative in the larger
interest of public health.
ii) MCI recognised institutions which impart 6 years
of medical education with one year’s of internship.
Therefore, degrees issued by such recognised
institutions to students who have put in 6 years of
medical education and have successfully
completed the course and obtained the degree
and thereafter have completed one year of
internship (both in recognised institutions) would
be recognised by MCI and will be considered
eligible for provisional/permanent registration as
the case may be.
iii) In relation to students who have completed 6
years of medical education, out of which initial
period of not more than 4 months was in an
unrecognised institution, and the rest in a
recognised institution the MCI will accept their
request for registration upon their completing 16
months of internship.
iv) The students who have completed 6 years of
medical education but have studied more than 4
months but not more than 6 months in an
unrecognised institution (and the rest in a
recognised institution) should be required to
undergo an additional internship of 12 months
over and above the usual internship of 12 months
i.e. total internship of 24 months.
v) In case of the students who have studied 5 =
years of medical education (although in a
recognised institution) would appear in an
examination and upon being successful (in not
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 18
more than 3 attempts) will be required to undergo
regular 12 months of internship after which they
would be considered for registration.
vi) In all other cases, where the candidate is
otherwise qualified (i.e.) he has obtained more
than 50% marks in Physics, Chemistry and
Biology in the 10+2 examination but has put in
less than 5 = years in a recognised institution
(whether on account of a compressed course or
on account of putting in more than 6 months in an
unrecognised institution), the candidate may be
required to surrender his degree to his recognised
institution, complete the deficient period so as to
have completed 6 years of medical education in
the same recognised institution and thereafter
obtain a fresh degree from the said recognised
institution. It may be clarified that this deficient
period can be covered only by going back to the
same institution from where he has earlier
obtained the degree which has now been
surrendered.
vii) The screening test required to be undergone by
the candidates will be the same as conducted by
the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New
Delhi for the candidates desirous of admission in
the post-graduate courses in the institute. The
Council was of the view that this test would be
most appropriate to test the provisional
knowledge of medical graduates of institution in
Russian Federation & other CIS countries."
This Court passed an interim order dated 17.4.2000 in the
pending appeals accepting the resolution, reproduced above, passed
by the General Body of the MCI with the modification that screening
test required to be undergone by the candidates covered by the clause
(vii) should be of the standard of MBBS and not of post-graduate
course of All India Institute of Medical Sciences as suggested in the
resolution. Resolution of the MCI was accepted as an interim
arrangement. It was directed that those of the students who are
covered by any of the categories mentioned in clauses (i) to (vii) of the
resolution (supra) and are agreeable to the suggestions contained
therein shall get the benefit of the resolution to the extent applicable to
each one of them. The candidates who get benefit under the aforesaid
resolution of the MCI and are entitled to registration shall be registered
provisionally within four weeks from the date they applied for such
registration. It was clarified that the benefit being taken by any of the
candidates is without prejudice to any submissions which may be
made in the pending appeals at the time of final hearing.
In pursuance of the above decisions, the Central Government
proceeded with the procedural formalities for amending Section 13 of
the Act to give effect to these executive decisions. After completion of
the procedural formalities a Bill further to amend the Act was
introduced in the Rajya Sabha on 12.3.2001 with the following
Statement of Objects and Reasons thereof:
"1. The Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 contains
provisions in Sections 12, 13 and 14 with a view
to recognizing medical qualifications granted by
medical institutions in foreign countries.
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 18
2. Over a period of time it has come to notice that a
large number of private agencies sponsor
students for medical studies in institutions outside
India for commercial considerations. Such
students also include the students who did not
fulfil the minimum eligibility requirements for
admission to medical courses in India. Serious
aberrations have been noticed in the standards of
medical education in some of the foreign
countries which are not at par with the standards
of medical education available in India. Due to
lack of uniformity in the standards of medical
education in various foreign countries, it has been
decided that a provision should be made in the
Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 to enable the
Medical Council of India to conduct a screening
test in order to satisfy itself with regard to the
adequacy of knowledge and skills acquired by
citizens of India who obtain medical qualifications
from universities or medical institutions outside
India before they are granted registration to
practice medicine in India.
3. Further, issue of prior eligibility certificate by the
Medical Council of India would ensure that only
those candidates who conform to the Council
norms of admission to the medical college in India
would go for undergraduate medical education
outside India.
4. The Bill seeks to achieve the above objects.
C.P.THAKUR
NEW DELHI
THE 2ND MARCH, 2001."
The Bill being after passed by both the Houses of the
Parliament, the Section 13 of the Act was amended. It was to come
into force from the date it was notified in the Gazette of India.
On 28.9.2001 in accordance with the provisions of the Indian
Medical Council (Amendment) Act, 2001 (for short "amending Act of
2001") MCI submitted to the Central Government the drafts of the
"Screening Test Regulations", 2002 and "Eligibility Requirement for
taking admission for an Undergraduate Medical Course in Institutions
Abroad Regulations, 2002" for obtaining the previous approval of the
Central Government before its notification in the Official Gazette by the
MCI under Section 33 of the Act. While forwarding the draft
regulations the MCI indicated in its communication dated 28.9.2001
that in accordance with the amending Act of 2001 the power to specify
the date from which the provisions of the Act were to take effect vested
with the Central Government, such date may be specified by the
Central Government while according its approval to the draft
regulation. Accordingly, while returning the draft regulations to the
MCI after its approval through its communication dated 13.2.2002 the
Central Government specified 15.3.2002 as the date from which the
provisions of the Regulations would take effect. The said Regulations
were notified by the MCI in the Official Gazette on 18.2.2002. Further,
in accordance with the amending Act of 2001 it is the Central
Government which has specified 15.3.2002 as the date from which no
Indian citizen with a foreign primary medical qualification shall be
granted registration, whether provisional or permanent, to practice
medicine in India.
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 18
Appeals filed by the MCI were finally decided by this Court by
passing a common judgment dated 8.3.2002 in CA No. 2779 of 2000 \026
Medical Council of India Vs. Indian Doctors from Russia Welfare
Associations & Ors., with connected matters reported in 2002 (3)
SCC 696. It was noticed by the Government of India that there were
number of persons who applied to MCI for grant of provisional
registration after completion of their degrees abroad prior to 15.3.2001
but were not granted provisional registration by MCI for various
reasons including that they have not undergone complete duration of
six years of the medicine course from institutes recognised by the MCI
and those who did not fulfil the minimum eligibility criteria for joining
medical course laid down by the MCI at the time of their admission in
the medical institutions abroad and came back with medical degrees
which were not recognised by the MCI. In order to regulate the
registration to such persons who had completed their degrees abroad
prior to 15.3.2001, the Government framed guidelines dated 15.3.2001
which were placed before the Court. The Court took note of the
provisions of amended Section 13 of the Act and the fact that the
same had been published in the Gazette dated 18.2.2002 by the MCI
after obtaining the approval from the Government of India. The
guidelines dated 15.3.2001 were approved by this Court in exercise of
the power under Article 142 of the Constitution. The guidelines were
approved by way of one time measure and it was observed that
future cases will be governed by the revised guidelines framed by the
MCI as approved by the Government.
FACTS IN THE PRESENT CASE:
Broadly speaking writ petitions can be divided into two groups.
In the first group would fall the writ petitioners who went to prosecute
their M.D. Physician course in the year 1994 (hereinafter referred to as
"the 1994 batch") and the second group which went in the year 1995
and afterwards (hereinafter referred to as "the second group").
Writ petitioners went to various countries forming part of
erstwhile USSR for studying M.D. Physician course which is equivalent
to MBBS in India. As per averments made in the writ petitions all the
writ petitioners were eligible as per eligibility criteria prescribed by MCI
for admission to MBBS course. They undertook one year preparatory
course which comprises of Biology, Physics, Chemistry and Russian
language. At the end of the said preparatory course, a written
examination was conducted by a committee appointed and selected by
the Ministry of Health care of the State in which the said institute and
university was situated. An oral test for proficiency and understanding
in Russian language was conducted by the committee. The students
in order to be eligible for M.D. Physician course were required to pass
the merit based examination with minimum of 60% marks in
aggregate. Admission to the M.D. Physician course was based on the
marks obtained by students in the admission test. Students who failed
to secure 60% marks in the preparatory course were returned back to
India without getting admission in the medical course. Some medical
institutions conducted their own admission tests and only those who
qualify on merit were offered the M.D. Physician course.
After successful completion of the preparatory course and
selection for the M.D. Physician course the petitioners undertook the 6
years medical course. The medical course comprises of 12 semesters
of six months duration each. Semester examinations were conducted
at the end of each semester which the candidate was mandatorily
required to pass in order to advance further. In the sixth year the
petitioners underwent internship as per the Rules and Regulations
prevailing in the respective countries. The batch of 1994 after
undergoing full length of their medical education completed their M.D.
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 10 of 18
Physician course in June 2001 and the petitioners who prosecuted
their M.D. Physician course between 1995 \026 2002 completed the same
in June 2002. The petitioners who joined the course in the year 1996
completed their course in 2003. The petitioners who joined in the years
1999 and 2000 are yet to complete their courses.
So far as the batch 2001 pass outs are concerned, they were
granted provisional registration by the MCI under the interim orders of
this Court but were denied permanent registration. 2002 batch pass
outs were refused provisional/permanent registration by the MCI.
Aggrieved against the denial of permanent registration petitioners filed
the writ petitions in this Court invoking writ jurisdiction under Article 32
of the Constitution, inter alia, alleging that:
The Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 was amended by the
Indian Medical Council (Amendment) Act, 2001 and the said
Amendment Act was published in the Official Gazette on 3.9.2001
after receiving the assent of the President of India. The unamended
Section 13 (3) of the Act, medical qualifications granted by medical
institutions included in Part II of Third Schedule of the Act are
recognised medical qualifications and persons possessing medical
qualifications are entitled for registration in India. However, by the said
amendment Section 13 (3) of the Act was amended and it was
provided that such medical qualifications shall henceforth be
recognised medical qualifications only "before such date as the Central
Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify". In
the Amending Act, it has been left to the Central Government to apply
its mind as to the date from which the amendment was to be given
effect to. While considering such date the Central Government had to
take into account the rights of the students/doctors who had already
left for studies of MBBS or equivalent courses in other countries
including the newly created States out of the erstwhile USSR. After
consideration, the Central Government, in its discretion, was to decide
the date from which the amendment was to come into force by
publishing it in a Gazette notification.
According to the petitioners no notification by the Central
Government has been published in the "Official Gazette" for bringing
into operation the amended Section 13 (3) of the Act and as such the
un-amended Section 13 (3) would apply in their cases. Section 13 (3)
only prescribes two conditions for doctors to be given permanent
registration, namely, that he is a citizen of India and has undergone
such practical training after obtaining that qualification as required by
rules and regulations in force. That the petitioners fulfilled these two
conditions laid down in Section 13 (3) and therefore are entitled to be
registered without the screening test. Insistence of MCI that the
petitioners should first clear the screening test and only then they can
be granted provisional/permanent registration was ultra vires of the Act
and therefore void. According to them, the notification published by
the MCI did not amount to issuance/publication of the notification by
the Government of India. That the Central Government being a
delegatee under the Act to notify the date could not abdicate/delegate
its functions and entrust to any other autonomous body including the
MCI. That if the power is conferred to do official acts in a certain way
they have to be done in the manner prescribed or not at all. Their
case is that since Central Government has not notified the date by
publication in the Official Gazette the amended Section 13 (3) has not
taken effect in law and the unamended Section 13 (3) of the Act shall
apply as if the amendment has not come into force.
Another point raised by the petitioners is that the requirement of
passing the screening test under Section 13 (4) (a) and (b) are not
applicable to the persons with "recognised medical qualifications"
covered by Section 13 (3) of the Act. That the screening test provided
is wide-ranging test covering the entire five year course to be tested
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 11 of 18
through multiple choice examinations in two days would result into
large scale failures and is as such unreasonable. Instead of being
subjected to a test the students can be asked to do extra internship.
That the screening test is disproportionate and unreasonable response
in the light of the fact that till 2000, and even thereafter, extra
internship was found to be an adequate protection of the educational
and public interest. Even if the screening test is to apply it should be
applied prospectively from 2006-2007 so that students who had joined
the course earlier than 2000-2001 are protected from screening test
but required to do extra internship.
MCI in its counter-affidavit after tracing out the entire background
of facts narrated in the foregoing paragraphs contended that the writ
petitions were misconceived and deserved to be dismissed. According
to them any candidate who was seeking provisional or permanent
registration from the MCI under the provisions of the Act after
15.3.2002 is mandatorily required to qualify the screening test. That
each candidate after completing 6 years of teaching and training in the
medicine course is required to undergo compulsory internship of 1
year after obtaining the qualification. The contention of the petitioners
that they cannot be subjected to the screening test because the
Central Government has not issued any notification in the official
Gazette specifying the date is incorrect and unsustainable in law. That
it is the Central Government which has specified the date of 15.3.2002
to bring the regulations in force. This date so specified by the Central
Government was published in the official Gazette as a part of the
regulation and therefore all the contentions to the contrary in the writ
petition were misconceived, incorrect and therefore denied. That
issues raised in the present petition were subject matter of Medical
Council of India (supra), in which this Court after hearing the parties
and perusing the documents placed on the record conclusively
decided that all the candidates who applied to MCI for provisional
registration after 15.3.2001 would become eligible to seek permanent
registration only after doing one year internship and passing the
screening test. In terms of the orders of the Court they all fall under
the provisions of Screening Test Provisions of 2002 and are required
to qualify the screening test before they are granted registration to
practice medicine in India. That it is an admitted case that the
petitioners obtained their medicine qualifications after 15.3.2001. They
obtained their provisional registration enabling them to do mandatory
internship of one year around September, 2001. They are seeking
grant of permanent registration after 15.3.2002 and therefore are
clearly under the statutory regulation to qualify in the screening test.
Similarly, the other contentions raised by the petitioners in the writ
petitions were also denied.
Counsel for the parties were heard at length on the points raised
in the writ petitions on 28 and 29th April, 2002. When the hearing of
the case was nearing the conclusion the Bench put it across to the
counsel for the parties that if the Court forms an opinion that the
students who are graduating from foreign universities and specially
from the universities of erstwhile USSR should undergo a screening
test and practical training before being held entitled to permanent
registration for medical practice in India than what should be the
nature, content and methodology of test and who should conduct it?
Learned counsels for the respondents agreed to hold high level
consultation and come back with their suggestions. Counsel for the
petitioners stated that they would hand over to the counsel of Union of
India and the MCI their suggestions within a week. Respondents were
put at liberty to consult the National Board of Examinations and such
other expert bodies as they deemed fit. The petitioners were permitted
to nominate any two representatives of theirs who should be present at
the time of hearing in the process of finalising the nature, screening
and methodology of the test proposed. The matter was adjourned to
12th July, 2004.
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 12 of 18
Union of India in compliance with the order dated 29th April, 2004
filed an affidavit stating therein that the suggestions received by the
petitioners were initially considered in a joint meeting called by the
Union of India on 23.6.2004 under the Chairmanship of the Joint
Secretary (Medical Education) in the Ministry of Health and Family
Welfare and attended by the members of the Sub-Committee
constituted by the MCI for this purpose and a representative from the
National Board of Examinations, Delhi. In this meeting it was decided
to afford personal hearing to two of the representatives of the
petitioners in its next meeting scheduled for 30.6.2004 to finalise the
nature, content and methodology of the screening test. In the meeting
held on 30.6.2004 in addition to the representatives from MCI, National
Board of Examinations, two representatives from the Directorate
General of Health Services were also associated to obtain their expert
opinion in the matter. Representatives of the petitioners were heard
by the Committee.
Suggestions made by the students-petitioners for permitting
extra period of internship over and above the normal one year of
internship in lieu of screening test was not found to be acceptable, the
same being contrary to the IMC (Amendment) Act, 2001. Similarly,
suggestion for grant of provisional registration to do one year
internship in India without having to pass the screening test was also
found not to be acceptable being contrary to the IMC (Amendment)
Act, 2001. Suggestion put forth by the petitioners for exclusion of the
pre-clinical and para-clinical entirely from the screening test was also
not found to be acceptable. It was reiterated that adequate knowledge
in these subjects was essential to undertake clinical practice.
However, taking into consideration the difficulty level expressed by the
petitioners it was recommended that question of the screening test
may be put in the ratio of 1/3rd from pre-clinical and para-clinical
subjects together and the remaining 2/3rd from clinical subjects.
In the meeting held on 23.6.2004 while considering the written
submissions made by the petitioners, for exempting them from
appearing again in papers qualified by them in previous attempts, the
members had agreed to the said suggestion. It was agreed that the
number of papers in the test could be three, one paper consisting of 50
questions each on pre-clinical and para-clinical subjects; second paper
consisting of 100 questions on medicine and allied subjects and the
third paper consisting of 100 questions on surgery and allied subjects
including Obstetrics and Gynaecology. The students were to obtain a
minimum 50% marks in each paper which they could clear in one or
more attempts having not to reappear in papers qualified in the
previous attempts. Wherever they qualified two of the three papers
with the minimum of 50% marks while attempting the last paper they
could be given grace marks upto 5 so as to declare them pass in the
screening test. This was done on the pattern of the University
examination for MBBS in India.
However, during the oral submissions in the meeting held on
30.6.2004 the representatives of the petitioners were unanimous in
their view that the number of papers in the screening test be reduced
to just one, either on the clinical subjects only or if need be with very
minor percentage of questions on pre-clinical and para-clinical
subjects. For the sake of convenience in conducting the test, the
paper can be divided into two parts, the questions on pre-clinical and
para-clinical subjects forming part I and the questions on clinical
subjects forming part II. A student could be declared as pass if he
secured a minimum of 50% marks in both the papers combined. In
this scheme the test was to be conducted on the basis of single paper
without any facility of grace marks. In case of failure the student is
required to attempt the paper again in both the parts of the papers, i.e.,
in Part I and II. Suggestion from the students that pass percentage be
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 13 of 18
reduced below 50% was not found to be feasible and acceptable as
the same had to be in tune with the minimum pass percentage fixed
for MBBS examination. National Board of Examinations was to
conduct the test and the level of questions put in the examination was
to be at the level of final year MBBS only and not at the level of Post
Graduate Entrance Examination.
The minutes of the meeting held on 30.6.2004 were approved by
the Government and forwarded to the MCI and the National Board of
Examinations for further appropriate action. MCI has also approved
the minutes of the meeting held on 30.6.2004.
In response to the affidavit filed by the Union of India petitioners
filed their rejoinder. They reiterated that it would be difficult for the
students to clear the screening test at this belated stage.
Counsel for the parties had been heard at length.
Main thrust of the submissions made on behalf of the petitioners
is that all the petitioners have studied full length of the course from
medical institutes/Universities which are recognised by the MCI. They
did not suffer from any disqualification or ineligibility and therefore they
cannot be subjected to any condition of screening test. That the
judgment of this Court in Medical Council of India (supra), was in
respect of those Indian students from Russia who had suffered one or
the other kind of disqualification or ineligibility. There was not a single
case as of the petitioners herein who do not suffer from any
disqualification and/or ineligibility. The petitioners w ho did not suffer
from any disqualification or ineligibility and have studied their entire
course of M.D. Physician (which is equivalent to MBBS in India) from
Medical Institute or University recognised by the MCI under the Act
could not be subjected to qualifying screening test. That the law laid
down by this Court in Medical Council of India (supra), is not
applicable to the petitioners. Another submission made on their behalf
is that the amended Act was to come into force from the date to be
notified by the Central Government and since the Central Government
has not notified the date by publishing it in the official Gazette the
same has not come into force. That the Central Government did not
have any jurisdiction to further delegate the power to publish the
notification in the official Gazette to the MCI. A delegatee of the power
under the Act could not further delegate its functions unless so
authorised under the Act.
As against this the case of the respondents is that standard of
medical education cannot be permitted to be lowered in the larger
public interest. A person who is not duly or adequately qualified
cannot be permitted to administer public health care to the public at
large to their detriment. That the cut off date was fixed and approved
by the Central Government which has been published in the official
Gazette which is sufficient compliance and the amended provision has
come into force. That the issues raised in these writ petitions are not
res integra and they stand concluded by the three-Bench judgment of
this Court in Medical Council of India (supra).
The decision of this Court in Medical Council of India (supra),
is required to be analysed in depth. Students mainly being of 1997-
1998 pass outs who were affected by the action of the MCI refusing
the grant of registration approached various High Courts agitating
their grievances against the MCI and praying for grant of
provisional/permanent registration. Initially the High Courts granted
the reliefs prayed for by such affected students and directed the MCI
to grant them provisional/permanent registration. The MCI being
aggrieved filed appeals against the judgments of the High Courts in
which leave was granted. During the course of the hearing of the
appeals on different occasions the Court made certain observations
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 14 of 18
keeping in view the interest of all concerned, i.e., standards of medical
education, students and the public health in general. The Court asked
the Government of India to formulate an appropriate policy bearing in
mind the human problem arising in relation to the doctors in question.
Section 13 of the Act was thereafter amended by the Act of 34 of 2001
providing for to cover situation as arising in the cases before the Court.
The Court noted that the questions for conduct of the screening
test and for issue of eligibility certificate by the MCI to the students
proceeding abroad for studies in medicine were approved by the
Government of India and sent to MCI. The MCI sent the same on
18.2.2002 to the Government of India press for publication in the
Gazette, which was published in the official Gazette on 15.3.2002.
After noting the provisions of amended Section 13 of the Act and the
fact that the same have been published in the Gazette dated
18.2.2002 by the MCI after obtaining the approval from the
Government of India, it was observed:
"5. Under the provisions of the Act a person has to
successfully complete compulsory internship of one
year after getting provisional registration and all persons
who applied for provisional registration and have to do
the internship on or after 15.3.2001 will be required to
qualify the screening test as per the provisions of the
Screening Test Regulations, 2002, as they would
become eligible for permanent registration on or after
15.3.2002, that is, after successful completion of one
year internship. However, the Government noticed that
there are a number of persons who have applied to MCI
for grant of provisional registration after completion of
their degree abroad prior to 15.3.2001 and have not
been granted provisional registration by MCI for various
reasons, such persons fall into the following categories:
(a) those who did not undergo the complete
duration of six years of the medicine course
from institutes recognised by MCI;
(b) those who did not fulfil the minimum
eligibility criteria for joining medical course
laid down by MCI at the time of their
admission in the medical institutions
abroad, particularly in the erstwhile States
of USSR; and
(c) those who came back with medical degrees
which are not recognised by MCI."
Under the provisions of Amended Act a student was required to
successfully complete compulsory internship of one year after getting
provisional registration. The students who applied for provisional
registration after 15.3.2001 were required to do one year of internship
and to qualify the screening test as per the Screening Test
Regulations, 2002. The Government noticed that there are number of
persons who applied to MCI for grant of provisional registration after
completion of their degree abroad prior to 15.3.2001 but were not
granted provisional registration by MCI for various reasons including
that they have not undergone complete duration of six years of the
medicine course from institutes recognised by the MCI; and those
who did not fulfil the minimum eligibility criteria for joining medical
course laid down by the MCI at the time of their admission in the
medical institutions abroad and those who came back with medical
degrees which were not recognised by the MCI. In order to regulate
the registration to such persons who had completed their degree
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 15 of 18
abroad prior to 15.3.2001, the Government framed the following
guidelines which were placed before the Court.
"6. In order to regulate the grant of registration to
such persons who have completed their degree abroad
prior to 15.3.2001, the following guidelines are placed
before this Court by the Government of India:
(A) The case of all persons who applied for
registration to MCI prior to 15.3.2001 shall be
dealt with according to the provisions of the Act
as existing prior to the commencement of the IMC
(Amendment) Act, 2001 subject to the following:
(i) Those students who obtained degrees
where the total duration of study in
recognised institutions is less than six
years (i.e. where a part of the study has
been in unrecognised institutions, or the
total length of study in a recognised
institution is short of six years), shall be
granted registration by MCI provided that
the period of shortfall is covered by them
by way of additional internship over and
above the regular internship of one year.
In other words, for such categories of
students, the total duration of study in a
recognised institution plus the internship,
would be seven years, which is the
requirement even otherwise.
(ii) Where students who did not meet the
minimum admission norms of MCI for
joining undergraduate medical course,
were admitted to foreign institutes
recognised by MCI, this irregularity be
condoned. In other words, the degrees of
such students be treated as eligible for
registration with MCI.
(B) All students who have taken admission abroad
prior to 15.3.2002 and are required to qualify the
screening test for their registration as per the
provisions of the Screening Test Regulations,
2002 shall be allowed to appear in the screening
test even if they also come in the categories of
circumstances contained in (A) (ii) above, as the
relaxation contained therein would also be
applicable in their case. In other words, any
person at present undergoing medical education
abroad, who did not conform to the minimum
eligibility requirements for joining an
undergraduate medical course in India laid down
by MCI, seeking provisional or permanent
registration on or after 15.3.2002 shall be
permitted to appear in the screening test in
relaxation of this requirement provided he had
taken admission in an institute recognised by
MCI. This relaxation shall be available to only
those students who had taken admission abroad
prior to 15.3.2002. From 15.3.2002 and onwards
all students are required to first obtain an
Eligibility Certificate from MCI before proceeding
abroad for studies in Medicine.
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 16 of 18
(C) The categories of students not covered in (A) (i)
and (ii) above and whose entire period of study
has been in a medical college not recognised by
MCI, will be allowed to appear in the screening
test for the purpose of their registration provided
they fulfil all the conditions laid down in the IMC
(Amendment) Act, 2001. In other words, the
qualification obtained by them must be a
qualification recognised for enrolment as medical
practitioner in the country in which the institution
awarding the same is situated and they must be
fulfilling the minimum eligibility qualification laid
down by MCI for taking admission in an
undergraduate medical course in India. They
shall not be entitled to any relaxation."
The Court approved the guidelines placed before the Court in
exercise of powers under Article 142 of the Constitution and made
them applicable to all such persons who were similarly situated
whether they were before the Court or not. The Court pointedly held
that in respect of those who have already applied for registration to
MCI, the same shall be granted or refused within a period of 15 days in
terms of the order passed and on the grant of such registration the
students shall undergo internship or the housemanship, if needed. It
was made clear that guidelines approved by the Court was by way of
one time measure. But for future cases it was observed that they shall
be governed by the revised regulations framed by the MCI as
approved by the Government. It was observed:
"7. In the special features and circumstances arising
in these cases, it is unnecessary to consider the
various contentions urged on behalf of the parties
but we propose to dispose of these matters by
approving the guidelines set forth above in
exercise of powers under Article 142 of the
Constitution and these guidelines will be
applicable to all such persons who are similarly
situate, whether they are parties before this Court
or not. In respect of those who have already
applied for registration to MCI, the same shall be
granted or refused within a period of 15 days from
today in terms of this order. On grant of such
registration, the students shall undergo the
internship or the housemanship, if needed. It is
made clear that these guidelines approved by us
are by way of a one-time measure. Future cases
will be governed by the revised Regulations
framed by MCI as approved by the Government.
8. The orders of the High Courts shall stand
displaced by this order and these appeals shall
stand disposed of accordingly. Any proceeding
pending in any High court relating to these
matters shall stand withdrawn to this Court and
disposed of in the same terms as aforesaid."
[Emphasis supplied]
In Medical Council of India (supra), this Court was seized of
the issues which have been raised in these petitions. The Court noted
that it is the Central Government which had fixed the cut off date and
had asked the MCI to get it published in the official Gazette which was
duly done on 15.3.2002. The Court after reproducing the regulations
came to the conclusion that persons who applied for provisional
registration and have to do the internship on or after 15.3.2001 will be
required to qualify the screening test as per the provisions of the
Screening Test Regulations, 2002, as they would become eligible for
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 17 of 18
permanent registration on or after 15.3.2002, i.e. after successful
completion of one year internship. Government taking notice of the
fact that there are number of persons who had applied to MCI for grant
of provisional registration after completion of their degrees prior to
15.3.2001 formulated guidelines to grant registration to the such
persons who had completed their degrees abroad prior to 15.3.2001.
These guidelines were approved by the Court as one time measure
but it was held that in future all cases will be governed by the revised
regulation. This observation of the Court forecloses the contentions
which have been raised by the petitioners in these petitions regarding
the coming into force of the amended Act as well as the applicability of
the amended provisions to the students who have applied for
registration after 15.3.2001.
Students who passed the medicine course in 2001 must have
joined the language course in the year 1994 and the medicine course
in the year 1995. Students who passed the medicine course in 2002
must have joined the language course in the year 1995 and the
medicine course in the year 1996. Similarly, students who joined the
medicine course in 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000 and 2001 and prior to
15.3.2002 shall also be governed by the screening test regulation even
though they have joined the medicine course prior to the coming into
force of the screening test regulation on 15.3.2002. Thus the students
who passed the medicine course in 2001, 2002 are not different from
the students who have passed or will pass medicine course in 2003,
2004, 2005 and 2006 and thereafter respectively.
Candidates who applied to MCI for provisional registration after
15.3.2001 would complete their one year internship after the cut of
date of 15.3.2002. They would become eligible to seek permanent
registration after the commencement of the provisions of the
Screening Test Regulations, 2002. In terms of the orders of this Court
in Medical Council of India (supra), they all fall under the provisions
of the Screening Test Regulations, 2002 and were required to qualify
the screening test before they are granted registration to practice
medicine in India. The grant of provisional registration to them by MCI
under Section 25 of the Act to do the one year internship did not
provide them with any automatic right for grant of permanent
registration thereafter since Section 25 of the Act makes it clear that
provisional registration could be granted for the purpose of undergoing
the practical training and for no other purpose.
Under the Amendment Act 34 of 2001 the cut off date was to be
specified by the Central Government. It is not in dispute that the cut
off date was specified by the Central Government. The executive
policy which was prevalent before 2001 has been given the shape of
legislative policy. Such legislative policy having regard to the
purposes and objects the MCI seeks to achieve can neither be said to
be unreasonable nor arbitrary in terms whereof the student obtaining a
degree from a foreign university is subject to a screening test.
There is sufficient and substantial compliance with the provisions
of Section 13 (4A) of the Act by the Government of India. It is the
Government of India which had fixed 15.3.2002 has the date for
bringing into force the screening test regulations. Government of India
in its affidavit filed in January 2002 as specifically stated that it is the
Government of India which had fixed 15.3.2002 as the date for
bringing the screening test regulation.
Suggestion of the petitioners that they should be allowed to join
the internship by grant of provisional registration without qualifying the
screening test whereby they can involve themselves in the patient care
and management cannot be permitted in the larger public interest.
Besides the above this suggestion is contrary to the Regulation 3 of
the Screening Test Regulations, 2002 and to the observations in
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 18 of 18
para 4 of the judgment in Medical Council of India (supra).
Regulation 3 of the Screening Test Regulations, 2002 provides
that provisional registration can be granted to the candidate enabling
him to start internship for practical training involving patient care and
management only after qualifying the screening test. It is not
permissible to grant provisional registration to a candidate who has not
undertaken internship at the recognised medical institution abroad
after completion of six years of medicine course without qualifying the
screening test.
MCI is the expert body which can lay down the criteria for grant
of the permanent registration to a person to practice medicine and
involving himself in the patient care and management. Otherwise also
we are not inclined to permit the petitioners to practice medicine
overriding the provisions of the Act as the Court has to take into
consideration the interest of the public at large as well. A person who
is not duly qualified as prescribed by the MCI cannot be permitted to
involve himself in public health care and play with the lives of human
beings. It is not for this Court to decide as to who is duly qualified to
practice medicine. MCI being the expert body is the best judge to do
so. After a thorough examination of the entire issue the MCI has come
to the conclusion that after disintegration of USSR serious aberrations
in the system of recruitment and admission of students in institutions
located in Russia, there was a decline in the standards of medical
education in these countries. In this backdrop the MCI keeping in view
the interest of the public at large and the students passing from these
institutions decided that the students would be required to do
internship for one year as well as to qualify the screening test before
they could be given a permanent registration involving themselves in
the public health care.
Petitioners are not being debarred from starting medical practice
in India but they are merely to undergo screening test as provided in
the statutory regulation. The policy decision to subject the students to
undergo a screening test has been upheld by this Court in Medical
Council of India (supra).
The suggestion on behalf of the petitioners that only one paper
instead of three with less weightage in the screening test be given to
the pre-clinical and para-clinical subjects taught in the initial years of
the medicine course has been accepted. The suggestion that the
extra internship be provided in lieu of the screening test and that the
candidates be permitted to join the internship straightaway without
qualifying the screening test cannot be accepted being contrary to the
statutory regulations and against the public interest.
Minutes of the meeting held on 30.6.2004 which have been
approved by the Government of India and the MCI are approved. In
future the screening test would be conducted as per the guidelines laid
down in the meeting held on 30.6.2004.
For the reasons stated above, we do not find any merit in these
writ petitions and Civil Appeal and dismiss the same with no order as
to costs.