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

2014 Supreme(SC) 1174

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dipak Misra, Uday Umesh Lalit, JJ.
Lipika Gupta and another - Petitioners
Versus
U.O.I. and others - Respondents
In the Matter of:
Illhaam Ashraf - Applicant
Versus
Medical Council of India and others – Respondents
I.A. Nos. 27-28 of 2014 in W.P.(C) No. 737 of 2013
Decided On : 03-11-2014

Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Vikas Mehta, Adv.
For the Respondent:V.N. Raghupathy, Adv. Mr. Parikshit P. Angad, Adv. Mr. Irshad Ahmad, A.A.G. Mr. Abhisth Kumar, Adv. Ms. Archana Singh, Adv. Mr. Somraj Choudhury, Adv. Mr. Ramesh Babu M.R., Adv. M/s Corporate Law Group Mr. Ajay Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, Adv. Mr. C. D. Singh, Adv. Mr. Amit Kumar, Adv. Mr. Aniruddha P. Mayee, Adv. Mr. Charudatta Mahindrakar, Adv. Mr. A. Selvin Raja, Adv. Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Adv. Mr. Mishra Saurabh, Adv. Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Adv. Mr. Prateek Bhatia, Adv. Ms. Amandeep Kaur, Adv. Mr. T. Sighdev, Adv. Mr. Harsh Vardhan Surana, Adv. Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania, Adv. Mr. Tara Chandra Sharma, Adv. Ms. Neelam Sharma, Adv. Mr. Anip Sachthey, Adv. Mr. Saakaar Sardana, Adv. Ms. Pragati Neekhra, Adv. Mr. Sunny Choudhary, Adv. Ms. Mishra Saurabh, Adv. Mr. Kuldip Singh, Adv. Mr. V.G. Pragasam, Adv. Mr. C.J. Aristotle, Adv. Mr. Manjit Singh, A.A.G. Ms. Nupur Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Kamal Mohan Gupta, Adv. Ms. Pinky Anand, A.S.G. Mr. R.K. Rathore, Adv. Ms. Rekha Pandey, Adv. Mr. S.S. Rawat, Advocates.
For the Applicant :Dilip Annasaheb Taur, Advocate.

Headnote:

Medical Council of India Act, 1956 - Section 33 – Migration - No Objection Certificate" from the college - Exercise of power conferred under Section 33 of Act, 1956 - Counsel for applicant, that present application has been filed as Medical Council of India on basis of schedule fixed by this Court has not expressed any opinion to letter issued by Directorate of Medical Education, as a result of which applicant has been deprived of benefit of migration - Held, Applications shall be considered accordingly as per Medical Council of India Regulations as interpreted by us - It should be treated as an extension of period by this Court for purpose of migration - This Court hopes and trusts that respondent State shall take an attitude of sympathy and empathy and not a negative attitude or an attitude of obstinacy - No authority of State Government even remotely think to overreach orders of this Court and religiously follow command - Decision shall be taken within four weeks from date of receipt of applications - State of Karnataka shall file a report before this Court within four weeks hence - Let Interlocutory Applications be listed on December 1, 2014 – Direction issued – Order accordingly.

ORDER :

By Interlocutory Application No. 27 of 2014, the following prayers have been made:-

"(a) Allow the present I.A. and thereby direct the Medical Council of India to clarify its Regulation relating to migration as the same has been followed in a particular manner in all the States except in the State of Karnataka and further hold that the MCI Regulation being uniform has to be followed by the State of Karnataka and the MCI should not maintain silence under the guise that a schedule has been fixed for admission by this Hon'ble Court by virtue of order dated 19.05.2014 passed in W.P. (C) No. 737 of 2013 although it has nothing to do with migration; and

(b) Pass such further or other order or orders as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice."

2. It is submitted by Mr. Dilip Annasaheb Taur, learned counsel for the applicant, that the present application has been filed as the Medical Council of India on the basis of the schedule fixed by this Court has not expressed any opinion to the letter issued by the Directorate of Medical Education, Karnataka as a result of which the applicant has been deprived of the benefit of the migration.

3. Mr. Gaurav Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the Medical Council of India, submitted that migration has nothing to do with the fixation of the schedule and migration is permissible in law.

4. To get the things clear, we thought it apt to deal with the said issue.

5. It is not in dispute that the Regulations on Graduate Medical Education, 1997 (for short, 'Regulations') have been framed in exercise of power conferred under Section 33 of the Medical Council of India Act, 1956. Regulation 6, as amended on 20.10.2008, reads as follows:-

"6. Migration.

(1) Migration of students from one medical college to another medical college may be granted on any genuine ground subject to the availability of vacancy in the college where migration is sought and fulfilling the other requirements laid down in the Regulations. Migration would be restricted to 5% of the sanctioned intake of the college during the year. No migration will be permitted on any ground from one medical college to another located within the same city.

(2) Migration of students from one College to another is permissible only if both the colleges are recognised by the Central Government under section 11(2) of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 and further subject to the condition that it shall not result in increase in the sanctioned intake capacity for the academic year concerned in respect of the receiving medical college.

(3) The applicant candidate shall be eligible to apply for migration only after qualifying in the first professional MBBS examination. Migration during clinical course of study shall not be allowed on any ground.

(4) For the purpose of migration an applicant candidate shall first obtain "No Objection Certificate" from the college where he is studying for the present and the university to which that college is affiliated and also from the college to which the migration is sought and the university to it that college is affiliated. He/She shall submit his application for migration within a period of 1 month of passing (Declaration of result of the 1st Professional MBBS examination) alongwith the above cited four "No Objection Certificates" to : (a) the Director of Medical Education of the State, if migration is sought from one college to another within the same State or (b) the Medical Council of India, if the migration is sought from one college to another located outside the State.

(5) A student who has joined another college on migration shall be eligible to appear in the IInd professional MBBS examination only after attaining the minimum attendance in that college in the subjects, lectures, seminars etc. required for appearing in the examination prescribed under Regulation 12(1).

Note-1: The State Governments/Universities/Institutions may frame appropriate guideline

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