SEKAR REPORTER

Court News from Madras High Court

Full order mbbs eligibility certificate case THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH  W.P.No.12782 of 2021 and W.M.P.Nos.13576 & 13578 of 2021. Mr.Srinath Sridevan For Respondents  : Ms.Subharanjini Ananth Standing Counsel for R1 Mr.V.P.Raman Standing Counsel for R2 Mr.S.M.Deena Dayalan for R3 O R D E R This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the impugned communication

by · Published · Updated

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Orders Reserved on         :   21.10.2021

Pronouncing orders on    :    25.10.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH 

W.P.No.12782 of 2021 and W.M.P.Nos.13576 & 13578 of 2021

Mrs.Ouwshitha Surendran                                                                                                                         .. Petitioner

-Vs-

  • National Medical Commission,

Pocket-14, Sector – 8, Dwaraka Phase-1,

New Delhi – 110077,      India.

  • National Board of Examinations

Rep. by its Executive Director,

Medical Enclave, Ansari Nagar,      Mahatma Gandhi Marg (Ring Road)      New Delhi 110 029.

  • Association of Indian Universities,

AIU House 16, Comrade Indrajit Gupta Marg,     Opposite National Bal Bhawan, Near I.T.O.

New Delhi – 110 002.                                                              .. Respondents

 

(Respondent 3 is impleaded as per order made in W.M.P.No.15694 of 2021 in W.P.No.12782 of 2021 dated 05.08.2021)

Prayer:  Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the communication of the 1st respondent R.15012/03/2021-Regn/008931, dated 14.06.2021 and quash the same and consequently, directing the 1st respondent to issue the Eligibility Certificate to the petitioner in tune with the evolving knowledge systems in the world (such IELTS test for English).

For Petitioner  : Mr.Srinath Sridevan
For Respondents  : Ms.Subharanjini Ananth Standing Counsel for R1

Mr.V.P.Raman

Standing Counsel for R2

Mr.S.M.Deena Dayalan for R3

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the impugned communication

dated 14.06.2021 issued by the 1st Respondent wherein the request made by the Petitioner for issuance of eligibility certificate was rejected by the 1st Respondent.

  1. When the Writ Petition was taken up for admission on 15.06.2021, and

interim orders were passed permitting the Petitioner to write the Foreign Medical Graduate

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

Examination (hereinafter referred as FMG examination), pending disposal of the Writ Petition, this Court has dealt with the facts of the case and the issue involved in this Writ Petition and hence it will be more appropriate to extract the entire order hereunder:

  1. The petitioner is an overseas citizen of India. She hascompleted her education in the Central Board of Secondary SchoolEducation in India till her Secondary School Education i.e., Class Xfrom Bhavan’s Gandhi Vidyashram,

Kodaikannal, Tamilnadu. Oncompletion of her Class X, her family moved to Sri

Lanka. So, tocontinue her Higher Secondary Education, she chose Pearson EdexcelGCE A-Level Board of Examinations curriculum since it is closest toIndian and International level of education. Thereafter, she completedher Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery in SichuanUniversity, China and obtained MBBS degree.

  • The petitioner completed her education only in the EnglishMedium.

She has obtained a score of 7.5 out of 9 in InternationalEnglish Language Testing System (IELTS) issued by the BritishCouncil. She has also obtained her equivalence certificate from theAssociation of Indian Universities (hereinafter referred to as ‘AIU’) forher GCE A-Level Examination from Pearson Edexcel.

  • The Foreign Medical Graduate Examination (hereinafterreferred to as ‘Examination’) is conducted by the second respondent.The application form for said Examination involves submission ofEligibility Certificate issued by the first respondent and ForeignMedical Qualification Certificate, attested by Indian Embassy amongother documents. Hence, the petitioner applied to the first respondentwith all certificates and required documents for the EligibilityCertificate on 21.01.2021. Thereafter, when applications for the saidExamination opened, the petitioner applied to the second respondentfor the Examination on 05.05.2021.
  • While so, on 06.05.2021, the petitioner received acommunication from

the first respondent vide e-mail, wherein, it wasstated that her application for Eligibility Certificate was rejected for thereason that she did not study English as a subject in her HigherSecondary Education. Therefore, she made representation dated10.05.2021 to the first respondent in this regard, however, the samewas not considered. Hence, she filed W.P.No.12558 of 2021 beforethis Court and the same was disposed of vide order dated 10.06.2021with a following directions:

“4. In view of the said submission, the 1st respondent isdirected to consider the       representation submitted by the writpetitioner on 10.05.2021 and pass orders      and  communicate thesame to the writ petitioner on or before 14.06.2021       and in theevent of considering the case of the writ petitioner by the firstrespondent, the second respondent shall permit the petitionerto appear    for the said examination,       which is scheduled to beconducted on 18.06.2021.

  1. With these directions, the writ petition standsdisposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneouspetitions are closed.”

1.4. Subsequently, the first respondent vide order dated14.06.2021, rejected thepetitioner’s representation by stating asfollows:

“I am directed to refer to your representation dated10.05.2021 and to say that Hon’ble High Court of Judicatureat Madras vide its order dated 10.06.2021 has directed that therepresentation of petitioner dated 10.05.2021 may beconsidered.

  1. In this connection, it is to inform you that yourrepresentation dated 10.05.2021 has been examined in thisCommission and no evidence has been found to corroboratethat you have studied English as a regular subject in class 11thand

12th, which is an essential requirement for takingadmission into MBBS.”

Aggrieved by the rejection order issued by the first respondent,the petitioner has come before this Court with the present writ petition.

  1. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that byLetter dated 13.07.2011, the AIU has taken the following decision withregard to the issuance of Equivalence Certificates to the students whohave passed their GCE A – Level Examination from British ExaminingBodies:

“The candidate intending to pursue Professional Degreeprogrammes are required

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/to   have studied the subjects ofPhysics, Chemistry, Biology, Mathematics and English.

However, keeping in mind that under the British systemEnglish is not compulsory to be taught at Advanced Level. Theappropriate Authorities of AIU in their Meeting   held withregard to the subject of English took the following decision:

“5 (Five) passes at GCE O level/GCSE/IGCSE and 2(Two) / 3 (Three) passes at GCE      Advanced level of theapproved British Examining Bodies have been recognized by  AIU as equivalent to +2 stage qualification of an IndianBoard, giving access to the    Bachelor’s Degree programmes ofIndian Universities.

The candidate intending to     join Medical/EngineeringDegree programmes who have obtained at Advanced Levelpasses in Physics, Chemistry and

Biology/Mathematics, plusAS Level English from      British system will be eligible foradmission to professional courses provided the candidateshaving passed 12 Years Senior Secondary Examination froman Indian        Board with English as a subject are also exemptedfrom appearing English Language Test seeking admission tohigher courses at British Universities and/or employment.””

  1. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that inview of the aforesaid decision taken by AIU, the first respondent has toconsider the petitioner’s application for Eligibility Certificate. Therejection order issued by the first respondent is not consistent with thedecision taken by AIU. He would also submit that eligibility of thepetitioner would be decided only at the disposal stage of the presentwrit petition, so the petitioner may be permitted to write theExamination which is scheduled to be held on 18.06.2021. He wouldfurther submit that in the cases of similar nature, several orders havebeen passed by the High Courts permitting the petitioner(s) therein towrite the Foreign Medical Graduate Examination. Further, inParagraph No.30 of the affidavit, the petitioner undertakes that ifshe ispermitted to write the Examination, she will not seek any equities onthe basis of permission to write the Examination.
  2. Shubharanjani Ananth, learned counsel takes notice forthe first respondent and Mr.V.P.Raman, learned Senior counsel takesnotice for the second respondent.
  3. The learned counsel appearing for the first respondent wouldsubmit that the first respondent has rejected the petitioner’s applicationin the light of the rules/regulations prescribed under (i) MedicalInstitution Regulations, 2002 (ii) Regulations on Graduate MedicalEducation and (iii) National Eligibility Cum Entrance Test (UG) underChapter 4 Eligibility and Qualification Code – 7.
  4. The learned Senior counsel appearing for the secondrespondent would submit that the Examination is conducted by thesecond respondent. Due to the rejection order issued by the firstrespondent, the second respondent is not permitting the petitioner towrite the Examination. If the first respondent approved the petitioner’sapplication for Eligibility Certificate, the second respondent will permit the petitioner to write the Examination.
  5. Heard the learned counsel on both sides. The submissionsmade by the counsel on both sides with respect to merits of the casewill be considered at the time of disposal of this writ petition.
  6. Considering the facts narrated above and also in the light ofthe decision taken by AIU vide letter dated 13.07.2011, this Court isinclined to grant an order of interim direction only for protecting theinterest of the petitioner. Accordingly, there shall be an order ofinterim direction to the second respondent to permit the petitioner towrite the Examination which is scheduled to be held on 18.06.2021. Itis made clear that the second respondent shall not publish the results ofthe petitioner until further orders are passed by this Court. It is alsomade clear that in view of the undertaking in Paragraph No.30 of theaffidavit, the petitioner will not seek any equities on the basis ofpermission to write the Examination.
  7. It is brought to the notice of this Court by the learned counselappearing for the first respondent that the Association of IndianUniversities was not impleaded as a party in the present writ petition.Therefore, the petitioner is directed to implead the Association of Indian University as a party in this petition.
  8. The learned counsels appearing for the respondents 1 & 2respectively are directed to file the counter affidavit in the next date ofhearing.
  9. List the matter after three weeks.
  10. The 1st Respondent has filed a lengthy counter affidavit and the relevant

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/paragraphs are extracted hereunder:

  1. It is submitted that the Eligibility Requirement For Taking Admission in

anUndergraduate Medical Course in a Foreign Medical Institution

Regulations,2002 under Regulation 8 provides that the answering respondent shall considerthe application for issuing an Eligibility Certificate only if the candidate fulfils the Eligibility Criteria for admission to MBBS course in India, Le, minimumqualifying marks criteria in Physics, Chemistry, Biology Biotechnology & English, as prescribed in the Graduate Medical Education Regulations,

1997.Regulation 2(f) and Regulation 3 of the Eligibility Requirement For

TakingAdmission in an Undergraduate Medical Course in a Foreign Medical InstitutionRegulations, 2002 provide that a person desirous of joining an undergraduatemedical course must fulfil the requisite criteria of qualifying the examinationas stipulated in the Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 1997 i.e. SeniorSecondary Examination (Class 11 & 12) either from India or an equivalent examination from abroad.

  1. It is respectfully submitted that the present writ petition is not maintainable and deserves to be dismissed at the outset since a candidate aspiring foradmission in an undergraduate medical course in a Foreign Medical Institutionmust have qualified Senior Secondary Examination (Class 11th & 12th), from,India or obtained an equivalent examination from abroad but must fulfil the Eligibility

Criteria for admission to MBBS course in India as prescribed in the Graduate

Medical Education Regulations, 1997. The same includes undergoingregular, co-

 

terminus / simultaneous teaching and training in the subjects ofPhysics, Chemistry and Biology / Biotechnology with practicals alongwithEnglish in his/her Senior Secondary Education (Class 11th & 12th) for a period of two years and also obtaining the requisite minimum qualifying marks in Physics,Chemistry, Biology / Biotechnology & English individually as well as takentogether, as has been prescribed, which the Petitioner has not undergone.

  1. It is thus submitted that after the date of 15.03.2002, any candidate, prior totaking admission in any foreign medical institution has to approach the MCI forthe purpose of procuring an Eligibility Certificate and upon return aftercompleting the said foreign medical course had to qualify the Screening Test. Itis only after qualifying the Screening Test that the said candidate could seekregistration for the purpose of practising medicine in the country.
  2. It is therefore mandatory that each student should be enrolled for a period oftwo years and each student must undergo regular, co-terminus / simultaneousteaching and training in the subjects of Physics, Chemistry and Biology withpracticals alongwith English in his/her Higher Secondary Education (10+2).
  3. It is submitted that the Eligibility Requirement for Taking Admission in an Undergraduate Medical Course in a Foreign Medical Institution Regulations, 2002 under Regulation 8 provides that the Council shall consider the application for issuing an Eligibility Certificate only if the candidate fulfills the required criteria including the age criteria for admission to MBBS course inIndia as prescribed in the Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 1997. Theelevant portion of Eligibility Requirement For Taking Admission in an Undergraduate Medical Course in a Foreign Medical Institution Regulations,2002 is reproduced as under:

..

  1. The Council shall consider the application for EligibilityCertificate and verify the following details as per the Regulations of the Council –

(i)Whether the candidate fulfils age criterion prescribed by the Council?

(ii)Whether the candidate fulfills the eligibility criteria for admission to MBBS course in India as prescribed in the Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 1997, i.e.. minimum qualifying marks criteria in Physics, Chemistry, Biology and English, including relaxed criteria in case the candidate belongs to a reserved category.

  1. It is respectfully reiterated that the present writ petition is not maintainable and deserves to be dismissed at the outset since a candidate aspiring for being a registered medical practitioner in India must have qualified Senior Secondary Examination (Class 11th & 12th), from India or obtained an equivalent examination from abroad but must fulfill the Eligibility Criteria for admission to

MBBS course in India as prescribed in the Graduate Medical

EducationRegulations, 1997. The same includes undergoing regular, co-terminus / simultaneous teaching and training in the subjects of Physics, Chemistry and

Biology / Biotechnology with practicalsalongwith English in his/her Senior Secondary Education (Class 11th & 12th) for a period of two years and also obtaining the requisite minimum qualifying marks in Physics, Chemistry, Biology / Biotechnology & English individually as well as taken together, as has been prescribed, which the Petitioner has not undergone. Thus, the Petitioner had not undergone regular, continuous and co-terminus / simultaneousteaching and training in the subject of English.

  1. It is therefore, humbly submitted that in this view of the matter and the legalposition as laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court, it is most respectfully TOT FI Submitted that the prayer and relief sought in the present writ petition, in the most respectful submission of the answering respondent, being contrary to the statutory regulations and the various judgements of the Hon’ble Courts as submitted herein above would not be maintainable and the writ petition would deserve to be rejected. The answering respondent prays accordingly.
    1. The 3rd Respondent has also filed a counter affidavit. The 3rd Respondent

is the body which grants the equivalence certificate and the basis on which such a certificate is granted, has been explained in the counter affidavit.

  1. Heard Mr.Srinath Sridevan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mrs.Shubharanjini Ananth, learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent, V.P.Raman, learned Standing Cousnel for the 2nd respondent and Mrs.S.M.Deenadayalan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 3rd respondent.
  2. The main issue that is involved in the present Writ Petition is as to whether

the Petitioner has fulfilled the eligibility criteria for admission to MBBS course in India as prescribed in the Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 1997. (Hereinafter referred as Regulations). The relevant regulation which deals with the eligibility requirement is extracted hereunder:

4(2) He/She has passed qualifying examination as under:

The higher secondary examination or the Indian School CertificateExamination which is equivalent to 10+2 Higher Secondary Examinationafter a period of 12 years study, the last two years of study comprisingof Physics, Chemistry, Biology/Biotechnology and Mathematics or anyother elective subjects with English at a level not less than core courseof English as prescribed by the National Council of Educational Researchand Training after the introduction of the 10+2+3 years educationalstructure as recommended by the National Committee on education;

Note: Where the course content is not as prescribed for 10+2 education structure of the National Committee, the candidates will have to undergo a period of one year pre-professional training before admission to the Medical colleges;

Or

  • The intermediate examination in science of an Indian University/Board or other recognised examining body with Physics, Chemistry and Biology/Bio-technology which shall include a practical test in these subjects and also English as a compulsory subject;

Or

  • The pre-professional/pre-medical examination with Physics, Chemistry and

Biology/Bio-technology, after passing either the higher secondary school

examination, or the pre-university or an equivalent Examination. The preprofessional/pre-medical examination shall include a practical test in Physics,

Chemistry and Biology/Bio technology and also English as a compulsory subject;

Or

  • The first year of the three years degree course of a recognized university, with Physics, chemistry and Biology/Bio-technology including a practical test in three subjects provided the examination is a “University Examination and candidate has passed 10-2 with English at a level not less than a core course;

Or

  • Sc. examination of an Indian University, provided that he/she has passed the

B.Sc. examination with not less than two of the following subjects Physics, Chemistry, Biology (Botany, Zoology)/Bio-technologyand further that he/she has passed the earlier qualifying examination with the following subjects – Physics, Chemistry, Biology and English.

Or

  • Any other examination which, in scope and standard is found to be equivalent to the intermediate science examination of an Indian University/Board, taking Physics, Chemistry and Biology/Biotechnology including practical test in each of these subjects and English.
  1. It will also be relevant to take note of the Foreign Medical Institution Regulations, 2002 and the Screening Test Regulations, 2002 for the purpose of

understanding the scope and importance given to fulfil the eligibility criteria.

8.The relevant Regulation under the Foreign Medical Institutions Regulations,

2002 are extracted hereunder.

  1. The Council shall consider the application for EligibilityCertificate and verify the following details as per the Regulations of the Council (i)Whether the candidate fulfils age criterion prescribed by the Council?

(ii)Whether the candidate fulfills the eligibility criteria for admission to MBBS course in India as prescribed in the Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 1997, i.e.. minimum qualifying marks criteria in Physics, Chemistry, Biology and English, including relaxed criteria in case the candidate belongs to a reserved category.

9.After verification, as required, if the candidate is found to fulfill the eligibility criteria, the Council shall issue an Eligibility Certificate in the prescribed format to the candidate certifying that he/she is medical qualification. The certificate shall indicate that on return after obtaining the foreign primary medical qualification, the candidate shall have to undergo a screening test, subject to fulfilment of the conditions prescribed in the Screening Test Regulations, 2002, and that passing this test shall only entitle him to provisional/permanent registration by the Medical Council of India or the State Medical Councils.

  1. In case the candidate does not fulfil any of the qualifying criteria the Council may reject his application for issue of Eligibility Certificate giving the reasons therefor.
  2. The relevant portions in the Screening Test Regulations, 2002 is also

reproduced hereunder:

  1. Definitions. In these Regulations, unless the context otherwiserequires (f) “Primary Medical qualification” means a medical qualificationawarded by any medical institution outside India which is arecognized qualification for enrolment as medical practitioner in the country in which the institution awarding the said qualification is situated and which is equivalent to MBBS in India;

(h) “qualifying examination” means the examination to be qualified to become eligible for admission to MBBS course in India as prescribed in the Graduate

Medical Education Regulations,1997;

3.An Indian citizen possessing a primary medical qualification awarded by any medical institution outside India who is desirous of getting provisional or permanent registration with the Medical Council of India or any State Medical Council on or after 15.03.2002 shall have to qualify a screening test conducted by the prescribed authority for that purpose as per the provisions ofsection 13oftheAct:

Provided that a person seeking permanent registration shall not have to qualify the screening test if he/she had already qualified the same before getting his/her provisional registration.

  1. Eligibility Criteria:

No person shall be allowed to appear in the screening test unless:

1….

  1. he/she had obtained ‘Eligibility Certificate from the Medical Council of India as per the ‘Eligibility Requirement for taking admission in an undergraduate medical course in a Foreign Medical Institution Regulations, 2002’. This requirement shall not be necessary in respect of Indian citizens or overseas citizens of India who have acquired the medical qualifications from foreign medical institutions or have obtained admission in foreign medical institution before 15th March, 2002.”
    1. Keeping the above regulations in mind, this court has to give a finding as

to whether the Petitioner satisfies the requirements provided in the relevant regulations.

  1. It is an admitted case that the Petitioner comes under the Overseas Citizens of India (OCI) Category. For the present academic year, viz., 2021-2022, a stand has been taken by the UOI that these candidates will be treated on par with the Indian Citizens and they will be considered under the general category.
  2. It is an admitted case that the Petitioner studied in India till her Secondary School Education and thereafter, moved to Sri Lanka and continued her Higher Secondary Education. The curriculum that was undergone by the Petitioner was the closest to the Indian and international level of education. After completing the higher secondary education, the Petitioner completed her MBBS degree from a University in China.
  3. It is also an admitted case that while undergoing higher secondary

education, the group chosen by the petitioner consisted of Physics, Chemistry, Biology and Mathematics and admittedly English was not taught as a separate subject even though the medium of instruction was only in English. The Petitioner in order to substantiate her knowledge in English also relies upon the score secured by her in the International English Language Tests (IELTS) and the petitioner has secured a score of 7.5 out of 9. The

Petitioner has also obtained an Equivalence Certificate from the 3rd Respondent and by virtue of the same, she claims that the higher secondary education she underwent at Sri Lanka is equal to the 12th Senior School Certificate of Central Board of Secondary Education.

  1. The relevant Regulations, viz., the Foreign Medical Institution Regulations

and the Screening Test Regulations, 2002, makes it very clear that the candidate should fulfill the eligibility criteria for admission to MBBS course in India as prescribed in the Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 1997. If in case, the candidate does not fulfil the qualifying criteria, it is left opon to the 1st Respondent to reject the application for issuance of eligibility certificate. It is in exercise of this power, the 1st Respondent has proceeded to issue the impugned communication dated 14.06.2021. It is also made clear that any person possessing a primary medical qualification awarded by any medical institution outside India and who is desirous of getting provisional or permanent registration with the 1st Respondent or with the concerned State Medical Council, should qualify the screening test conducted by the concerned authority and such a candidate will be allowed to appear in the screening test only if he/she has obtained an eligibility certificate from the 1st Respondent.

  1. Having considered the above two regulations, this court has to now see if

the petitioner possesses the qualification under Regulation 4(2) of the Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 1997 which provides for the eligibility criteria for admission to the medical course in India. The relevant Regulations had already been extracted supra.

  1. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the National Medical Commission submitted that the candidate has to strictly fulfil the requirements under the Regulations and under no circumstances the requirements can be diluted. To substantiate this submission, the learned counsel also relied upon the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court wherein it was held that the standards fixed must be strictly adhered to and no deviations must be permitted. The learned counsel by relying upon Regulation 4(2) submitted that there is a specific requirement to study English as a compulsory/ core subject and admittedly the petitioner has not fulfilled this requirement and therefore, the petitioner is not qualified to get the eligibility certificate. The learned counsel also submitted that the relevant Regulations have not been put to challenge and the consequence of the Regulation which resulted in the impugned communication issued by the 1st Respondent alone has been put to challenge and this Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed on this sole ground. The learned counsel also placed reliance upon the latest judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kaloji Narayana Rao University of Health Sciences v. SrikeertiReddiPingle&Ors  (hereinafter referred as Kaloji University Case) in Civil Appeal No. 390 of 2021, dated 16.02.2021. The relevant portions in the judgment are extracted hereunder:
  1. It is apparent that the High Court followed its previous judgment, and did not closely scrutinize the equivalence certificate or the subject stipulations. It alsoappears to have been largely influenced by the fact that the candidate was in factadmitted by the University. In the opinion of this court, the construction placed on Regulation 4(2), i.e., that each of the sub clauses (a) to (f) prescribes independent qualifications which should be deemed essential, is rather simplistic. That interpretation ignores the fact that each of the sub-clauses insists that certain subjects should have been studied, and practical examinations attempted at the 10+2 or equivalent level. Secondly, the college or intermediate examination for equivalent qualifi cations under Regulation 4(2)(f)] cannot be read in isolation, having regard to the circumstances. The provision must be read in the context of the requirements for eligibility under Regulations 4(2)(a) to (e). The equivalence in qualification is not merely at the level of a 10+2 requirement, i.e., that the candidate should have passed an ex amination equivalent to the intermediate science examination at an Indian Uni versity/ Board. Additional to this requirement, Regulation 4(2)(f) requires equivalence in ‘standard and scope’ in an examination where the candidate is tested in Phys ics, Chemistry and Biology including practical testing in these subjects, along with English. These subject matter requirements are consistent across Regulations 4(2)(a) to (e) and (f).
  2. The approach and construction placed by the High Court, in this court’s opinion, undermines the intent behind the MCI’s insistence that a certain kind of education should be undergone, which is that each candidate for the MBBS course should have undergone study in Physics, Chemistry and Biology, in each of the levels (i.e. the two years of 10+2 board examination, or the concerned intermediate examination) with practical exams, in each of those years; that he or she should also have had English as a subject, and that the score in Mathematics would be ignored and not taken into consideration”. It would be, in this context, necessary to clarify that the equivalence relied on by the Telangana Intermediate

Board in this case,-merely alluded to the general equivalence in terms of

education at the intermediate level,without stipulating whether the qualifications were equivalent in terms of the subjects in which she undertook courses for the relevant years.

  1. The stipulation of equivalence in Regulation 4(2)(f) is not merely a formal one. The provision must be read in the context of the consistent conditions of eligibility prescribed in Regulations 4(2)(a) to (e), as noted above. This court, in State of Bombay v. R.M.D. Chamarbaugwala interpreted the definition of a prize competition!! A prize competition was defined as including crossword prize competitions, picture prize competitions, etc., and finally, any other prize competition, for which solution is or is not prepared beforehand by the promotors, or for which the solution is determined by lot or chance. This last qualification was appended only to the last sub-clause on any other competition. The court held that the qualification should be equally applicable to the other sub-clauses too, and that there was no difficulty in reading the qualifying clause as lending colour to each of those items. In the present case, Regulation 4(21) explicitly refers to the subject matter requirement reiterated in all the eligibility conditions from (a) to (e); the substance of the eligibility requirement indeed, is that the candidate should have qual ified an intermediate level examination or first year of a graduate course, and studied the subjects of Physics, Chemistry and Biology at this level, along with practical testing in these subject areas, and the English language. This subject matter requirement is at the heart of eligibility to be admitted into the medical course.

22.For these reasons, this court is of the opinion that the interpretation placed up on the regulations in both the cited cases, by the Madras High Court, do not reflect the correct position. To be eligible, the candidate should produce clear and categorical material to show that she underwent the necessary years of study in all the stipulated subjects. This court is of the opinion that such stipulations are to be regarded as essential, given that the course in question, i.e., MBBS primarily if not predominantly, involves prior knowledge – both theoretical and practical, of senior secondary level in biology or biological sciences.

  1. The learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that there is no

requirement to challenge the relevant regulation since the Petitioner is fulfilling the qualification prescribed in the regulation. To substantiate this submission, the learned counsel relied upon regulations 4(2)(a) and 4(2)(f). The learned counsel submitted that while stipulating the qualification under clauses (b) to (e) under regulation 4(2), it is very specifically stated that English must be compulsorily undergone as a subject. Whereas under clause (a), the insistence is not in undergoing English as a compulsory or a core subject. It was submitted that the Petitioner has undergone the Higher Secondary Course with English as the medium of instruction and has also obtained the equivalence certificate from the 3rdrespondent and the petitioner has also cleared IELTS with very high score and therefore the petitioner sufficiently fulfils the qualification. It was therefore submitted that the 1strespondent went wrong in refusing to issue eligibility certificate to enable the petitioner to write the FMGexamination.

  1. In the considered view of this court, the relevant regulation has to be

understood from the plain language that has been used in the regulation and this court cannot tweak it to suit the convenience of a candidate. Howsoever persuasive may be the plea raised by the learned counsel for the Petitioner by impressing upon the court that the Petitioner is good in English and has undergone the Higher Secondary Course through English medium, this court is duty bound to satisfy itself as to whether the Petitioner has fulfilled the qualification criteria as prescribed under the regulation. A careful reading of Clause (a) shows that the word “OR” has been placed in between physics, chemistry, biology/ biotechnology and mathematics on the one side and any other elective subjects on the other side. When it comes to English subject, it is applicable to both streams and it is also specifically provided that the English subject must be at a level prescribed by the NCERT. Therefore, Clause (a), by no stretch, dispenses with the candidate undergoing English as a compulsory subject.

  1. In so far as the fulfilment of Clause (f) is concerned, the Hon’ble supreme

court in KalojiNaryana Rao University case referred supra, has made it very clear that it cannot be read in isolation and it must be read in the context of the requirements for eligibility under regulations 4(2)(a) to 4(2)(e). Therefore, merely because the 3rd Respondent has issued an equivalence certificate, that does not mean that the Petitioner will be entitled for the eligibility certificate without satisfying the requirements of  any of the Clauses(a) to (e). Such an interpretation given by this court was specifically overruled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and in no uncertain terms it was held that the candidate has to necessarily undergo all the stipulated subjects which also included English language. Admittedly, the Petitioner has not undergone English as a separate subject in the Higher Secondary Course. The experts in their wisdom have stipulated an eligibility criteria and this court exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution of India,   cannot sit over judgment upon this stipulation made by the experts. The individual opinion of a judge cannot come in the way while  deciding cases of this nature and this court has to necessarily satisfy itself as to whether a candidate fulfils the qualification prescribed in the regulation. The law on this issue is well settled.

  1. In the result, there is no ground to interfere with the impugned

communication dated 14.06.2021 issued by the 1stRespondent and accordingly this Writ Petition stands dismissed.   No costs.  Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

25.10.2021.

 

Internet        : Yes

Index           : Yes/No

KP

To

  • National Medical Commission,

Pocket-14, Sector – 8, Dwaraka Phase-1,

New Delhi – 110077,      India.

  • National Board of Examinations

Rep. by its Executive Director,

Medical Enclave, Ansari Nagar,      Mahatma Gandhi Marg (Ring Road)      New Delhi 110 029.

  • Association of Indian Universities, AIU House 16, Comrade Indrajit Gupta Marg,     Opposite National Bal Bhawan, Near I.T.O.

New Delhi – 110 002.

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.

KP

Pre-Delivery Order in

W.P.No.12782  of 2021

25.10.2021

You may also like...