A clinical clerkship is required for foreign medical graduates to ensure quality in healthcare delivery.

JUDGMENT

Petitioner seeks for a direction to process his registration application by the second respondent. A further relief is also sought to declare that clerkship [clinical clerkship] is not required as per Ext.P21, since the petitioner had compensated for online classes with physical classes in the parent institution as directed by the first respondent.

2. Petitioner claims to be a foreign medical graduate who completed his medical course from Ukraine. According to the petitioner, he obtained his eligibility certificate and thereafter completed the course from Ukraine, which is equivalent to MBBS in India. After having undergone physical classes in the parent institution, including compensatory physical classes for the online classes undergone due to Covid-19 and obtained a graduation certificate. Subsequently, in order to carry out the Compulsory Rotating Medical Internship [CRMI], petitioner applied to the second respondent for provisional registration. The said application was not considered since the second respondent insisted that the petitioner undergo a clinical clerkship for one year. It was at this juncture the petitioner approached this Court with this writ petition, relying upon the judgment in W.P.(C) No.42885/2024.

3. I have heard Sri.S.A.Anand, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.K.S.Prejith Kumar, the learned Standing Counsel for the first respondent, Sri.N.Raghuraj, the learned Senior Counsel, instructed by Sri.Vivek Menon, the learned Standing Counsel for the second respondent and the learned Government Pleader.

4. By the judgment in Ext.P34, i.e., W.P.(C) No.42885/2024, the learned single Judge of this Court had held that, ‘Clinical Clerkship’ is not required for the petitioners therein as they had compensated for their online classes with physical classes conducted by the parent institutions as directed by the National Medical Commission. However, on appeal, by judgment dated 01.12.2025, the Division Bench reversed the said judgment and came to the conclusion that the insistence of respondents to undergo a one year Clinical Clerkship cannot be stated to be arbitrary, or unjustifiable, as it was intended to ensure the quality of healthcare delivery in the country.

5. Since the judgment relied upon by the petitioner to undergo clinical clerkship has been reversed by the Division Bench, and it has been observed that the clinical clerkship is necessary to ensure the quality of healthcare delivery in the country, I am of the view that, petitioner is not entitled for any relief as sought for in this writ petition. Hence, this writ petition is dismissed.

sd/-