SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(SC) 497

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R. V. Raveendran and A. K. Patnaik, JJ.
Medical Council of India
Vs.
J. Saai Prasanna and Ors. etc. etc.
Special Leave Petition Nos. 23641-23653 of 2008
Decided On: 09.05.2011

Headnote:A) Foreign Medical Institution Regulations : , INDIAN MEDICAL COUNCIL ACT : S.10(a), S.13(3), S.13(4)(a), S.15, S.25(1), S.25(4), Medical Practitioners and Dentists Act : , Screening Test Amendment Regulations : , Screening Tests Regulations : Reg.4:- This appeal arises out of the judgment of Andhra Pradesh High Court allowing the writ petition directing the MCI to grant recognition to the writ petitioners who have a medical degree issued by a Foreign University in Tanzania after going through the screening test successfully. MCI raised objection that they have completed a part of the course in a Medical College in Guntur which is not recognized then and had later gone through the remaining course and completed their internship also in Tanzania. While upholding the judgment of Andhra Pradesh High Court the writ petitioners were however were obliged to go through an additional one year of internship in India before getting permanent registration in view of long gap since their passing the test and course.

       

ORDER

1. The Medical Council of India (`MCI' for short), the Petitioner herein, challenges the order of the Andhra Pradesh High Court dated 2.5.2008 in a batch of writ petitions filed by students possessing medical qualifications from a foreign University, directing (i) MCI to grant provisional registration under Section 25(1) of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (`Act' for short) to all those students who have completed the screening test in accordance with the provisions of Section 13(4A) of the Act read with Screening Tests Regulations, 2002 (`Screening Regulations' for short); and (ii) MCI/State Medical Council, as the case may be, to grant permanent registration under Section 25(4) and Section 15 of the Act on the production of valid certificates in proof of completion of compulsory internship for one year.

2. The private Respondents are students who claim that they have completed the MBBS course in International Medical and Technological University (`IMT University' for short), a foreign University situated in Tanzania. The said university was established in Tanzania, by Vignan Education Foundation, an organization based in India. They fall under two categories. The first category are those who underwent the first two terms (Pre-clinical and Para clinical courses of 18 months each) between October 1998 and May 2002 at Katuri Medical College and Hospital, Guntur (which was, at that point of time, an unrecognized medical college) and the last term (the clinical course of 18 months) at Tanzania between June 2002 to November 2003/January 2004. The second category of students are those who underwent the entire course of study at Tanzania.

3. All these students, after successful completion of the course, underwent the Screening Test conducted by the National Board of Examinations as provided under the Screening Regulations. Some of the students were declined provisional registration and therefore could not do the internship in India and obtain permanent registration. Some of the students were granted provisional registration, completed the internship, but were declined permanent registration. Some students, after securing provisional registration and completing the internship, were granted permanent registration, but subsequently their registrations were cancelled. They all approached the High Court of Andhra Pradesh for relief.

4. The said petitions were resisted by MCI primarily on the following two grounds: (i) where an Indian student does any study in a medical college in India, established without the permission from the Central Government under Section 10A of the Act, is automatically disqualified from getting recognition of his medical degree, even if such degree is granted by a foreign University; and (ii) if a student's primary medical qualification is not a recognized qualification for enrolment as a medical practitioner in the country in which the Institution granting the medical qualification is situated, he will not be entitled to participate in the screening test examination.

5. The High Court, after exhaustive consideration, allowed the writ petitions holding that the writ Petitioners fulfilled the requirements of the Section 13(4A) of the Act and regulation (4) of the Screening Regulations, that is, (i) they were citizens of India, (ii) they had obtained a medical qualification outside India, granted by a medical institution (IMT University) in Tanzania, (iii) the medical qualification granted by the said medical institution in Tanzania is recognized for the purpose of enrolment as a medical practitioner in Tanzania, (iv) the Indian Embassy in Tanzania has confirmed that the medical qualification granted by IMT University, Tanzania (which granted the medical qualifications to the writ Petitioners) was a recognized qualification for enrolment as a medical practitioner in Tanzania; and (v) the writ Petitioners appeared and qualified in the screening test conducted by National Board of Examinations in India. As a co





















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top