Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Archita vs National Medical Commission on 9 December, 2022
Bench: B.R. Gavai, Vikram Nath
1
ITEM NO.55+36+58 COURT NO.9 SECTION X
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 607/2022
ARCHITA & ORS. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
NATIONAL MEDICAL COMMISSION & ORS. Respondent(s)
(IA No. 129608/2022 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 126974/2022
– INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 126953/2022 -
INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT)
WITH
W.P.(C) No. 183/2022 (PIL-W)
(IA No. 41712/2022 - PERMISSION TO APPEAR AND ARGUE IN PERSON)
W.P.(C) No. 171/2022 (PIL-W)
(IA No. 36593/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT, IA No.
38377/2022 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT)
W.P.(C) No. 229/2022 (PIL-W)
(FOR ADMISSION)
W.P.(C) No. 689/2022 (X)
(IA No. 120707/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL
DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)
W.P.(C) No. 377/2022 (PIL-W)
(FOR ADMISSION)
W.P.(C) No. 618/2022 (X)
(IA No. 136348/2022 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 127925/2022
– INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT)
W.P.(C) No. 620/2022 (X)
W.P.(C) No. 630/2022 (X)
(IA No. 119868/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL
DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) No. 631/2022 (X)
Digitally signed by
Deepak Singh
Date: 2022.12.13
17:16:11 IST
Reason:
W.P.(C) No. 587/2022 (X)
(IA No. 127054/2022 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION)
W.P.(C) No. 625/2022 (X)
2
IA No. 135452/2022 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION)
W.P.(C) No. 667/2022 (X)
(IA No. 142073/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS, IA No.
142070/2022 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 135694/2022 –
INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT)
W.P.(C) No. 679/2022 (X)
W.P.(C) No. 746/2022 (X)
(IA No. 129493/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No.
137014/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL
DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)
W.P.(C) No. 708/2022 (X)
(FOR ADMISSION)
W.P.(C) No. 725/2022 (X)
(FOR ADMISSION)
W.P.(C) No. 713/2022 (X)
(IA No. 135049/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL
DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)
W.P.(C) No. 761/2022 (X)
(FOR ADMISSION)
W.P.(C) No. 777/2022 (X)
(IA No. 135763/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT)
W.P.(C) No. 867/2022 (X)
(IA 179186/2022, IA No. 149221/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS
IA No. 172248/2022 – INTERVENTION/IMPLEADMENT, IA No. 179186/2022 -
PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)
W.P.(C) No. 879/2022 (X)
(FOR ADMISSION)
W.P.(C) No(s). 1038/2022
W.P.(C) No(s). 880/2022
Date : 09-12-2022 These matters were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.R. GAVAI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM NATH
For Petitioner(s)
Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Aishwarya Sinha, AOR
Ms. Priyanka Sinha, Adv.
3
Ms. Shubhi Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Alok K. Singh, Adv.
Mr. Aditya Malhotra, Adv.
Mr. Naveen Sharma Bhardwaj, Adv.
Mr. Umesh Babu Chaurasia, Adv.
Mr. Satish Pandey, AOR
Mr. Akbar Ali, Adv.
Ms. Megha Singh, Adv.
Mr. Abdul Qadir, Adv.
Mrs. Manjula Chaurasia, Adv.
Mr. Ashok Bannidinni, AOR
Mr. Salman Khurshid, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Lubna Naaz, AOR
Ms. Aadya Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Aman Khullar, Adv.
Mr. Mandeep Kalra, AOR
Ms. Shelley Singh, Adv.
Ms. Shruti Nayar, Adv.
Ms. Divya Singh Pundir, Adv.
Ms. Garima Singh, Adv.
Mr. Rishabh Lekhi, Adv.
Ms. Tanya Singh, Adv.
Ms. Anushna Sathpaty, Adv.
Mr. Rajiv Dutta, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Pramod Kumar Dubey, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Rahul Shyam Bhandari, AOR
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Adv.
Mr. Shighra Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Gunjan Malhotra, Adv.
Mr. Bhishm Pratap Singh, Adv.
Ms. Priyadharshni, Adv.
Mr. Prateek Mathur, Adv.
Mr. Satyam Pathak, Adv.
Mr. Amit Singh Rathore, Adv.
Mr. Manoj V. George, Adv.
Ms. Shilpa Liza George, AOR
Mr. K.M. Vigneshram, Adv.
Mr. Prasad Buddha Deo, Adv.
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Adv.
Mr. Jitender Kumar Mohapatra, Adv.
Md. Shaffi Mather, Adv.
Ms. Priyam Agarwa,, Adv.
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Adv.
Mr. Shighra Kumar, Adv.
Ms. Gunjan Malhotra, Adv.
4
Mr.Siddhartha Chodhury, AOR
Mr. Manish Vashitha, AOR
Mr. Vivek Kumar Singh, Adv.
Mr. Pushpinder Singh Sodhi, Adv.
Mr. Anand Prakash, Adv.
Mr. Ashish Mohan, Adv.
Mr. M.P Parthiban, Adv.
Mr. A.S. Vairawan, Adv.
Mr. R. Sudhakaran, Adv.
Mr. D. Alagendran, Adv.
Mr. G.R. Vikash, Adv.
Mr. D. Subrahmanya Bhanu, Adv.
Mr. T. Hari Hara Sudhan, Adv.
Ms. Reshmi Nandakumar, Adv.
Ms. Remya Raj, Adv.
Mr. Umesh Babu Chaurasia, Adv.
Mr. Satish Pandey, AOR
Ms. Manjula Chaurasia, Adv.
Mr. Umang Tripathi, Adv.
Ms. Jaishree Tandon, Adv.
Mr. Manish Tiwari, Adv.
Mr. Lalit Chahar, Adv.
Mr. Onkar Prasad, Adv.
Mr. Deepika Chavda, Adv.
Mr. Nikhil Tyagi, Adv.
Mr. Vikrant Rana, Adv.
Mr. Dharam Pal Saini, Adv.
Mr. A. Deb Kumar, Adv.
Mrs. A. Deepa, Adv.
Ms. Dumni Soren, Adv.
Mr. Sudarsh Menon, AOR
Ms. Rashmi Nandakumar, AOR
Mr. Remya Raj, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. K.S. Kulkarni, Adv.
Mr. Hitesh Kumar Sharma, adv.
Ms. Nidhi Kulkarni, Adv.
Ms. Niharika Dewivedi, Adv.
Ms. Yamini Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Ravish Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Nitin Sharma, Adv.
Ms. Bina Madhavan, Adv.
Ms. Sweena Nair, Adv.
Mr. Katabadi Ismail, Adv.
5
Mr. Tushar Mehta, SG
Mr. Aishwarya Bhati, ASG
Mr. K.M. Nataraj, Adv.
Ms. Vatsal Joshi, Adv.
Mr. Bhuvan Kapoor, Adv.
Mr. Sharath Nambiar, Adv.
Mr. Nakul Chengappa K.K., Adv.
Ms. Akriti A. Manubarwala, Adv.
Ms. Swati Ghildiyal, AOR
Mr. Pratush Shrivastava, Adv.
Ms. Devyani Bhatt, Adv.
Mr. Navanjay Mohapatra, Adv.
Mr. Mayank Pandey, Adv.
Mr. Prashant Singh-I, Adv.
Ms. Bani Dikshit, Adv.
Mr. Raj Bahadur, AOR
Mr. G.S. Makker, AOR
Mr. C.Mohan Rao, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Ramesh Allanki, Adv.
Ms. Aruna Gupta, Adv.
Mr. Vundavalli Aruna Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Syed Ahmed Naqvi, Adv.
Mr. Vikas Bansode, Adv.
M/s Ramesh Allanki Associates
Mr. Shubhranshu Padhi, Adv.
Mr. Vishal Banshal, Adv.
Mr. Rajeshwari Shankar, Adv.
Mr. Niroop Sukrithy, Adv.
Mr. Mohd Ovais, Adv.
Mr. Nishe Rajen Shonker, AOR
Mrs. Anu K. Joy, Adv.
Mr. Alim Anvar, Adv.
Mr. Rahul Verma, Addl. AG
Mr. Saurabh Trivedi, AOR
Mr. Ashok Kumar Panda, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Shashwat Panda, Adv.
Ms. Vandana Tiwari, Adv.
Ms. Simran Singh, Adv.
Mr. Anoop Prakash Awasthi, AOR
Ms. Prapti Singh, Adv.
Ms. Parthivi Ahuja, Adv.
Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari, AAG
Dr. Joseph Aristotle S., AOR
Ms. Devyani Gupta, Adv.
6
Ms. Tanvi Anand, Adv.
Mr. Shobhit Dwivedi, Adv.
Ms. Nupur Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Sanjeev Kr. Mahara, Adv.
Ms. Vaideshi Rastogi, Adv.
Mr. Ashok Kumar Sharma, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Ravi Sikri, Adv.
Mr. Kshitij Mudgal, Adv.
Mr. Abhinav Gar, Adv.
Mr. Sugandh Rathore, Adv.
Mr. Rishabh Shukla, Adv.
Mr. Vikalp Mudgal, AOR
Mr. Kshitij Mudgal, Adv.
Mr. Ashish Kumar Chaurasiya, Adv.
Mr. Ganga Sagar Singh, Adv.
Dr. Menaka Guruswawmy, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Utkarsh Pratap, Adv.
Ms. Neeha Nagpal, Adv.
Mr. Malak Bhatt, AOR
Ms. Samridhi, Adv.
Ms. Supriya Jhulka, Adv.
Mr. Nishant Kumar, Party in person
Mr. Rana Sandeep B., Party in person
Mr. Basant R., Sr. Adv.
Mr. Raghenth Basant, Adv.
Mr. M.F. Philip, Adv.
Ms. Purnima Krishna, AOR
Mr. Vishnu Pazhanganat, Adv.
Ms. Roopali Lakhotia, Adv.
Mr. Ajay Krishna, Adv.
Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Prateek Bhatia, Adv.
Ms. M. Goyal, Adv.
Mr. Dhawal Mohad, Adv.
Mr. Samar Vijay Singh, AOR
Ms. Amrita Verma, Adv.
Mr R. Sathish, AOR
Mr. Shery George Cherian, Adv.
Mr. Joseph Sebastian, Adv.
Mr. Mohandas K.K., Adv.
Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Bharat Swaroop Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Mathen Joseph, Adv.
Mrs. S. Geetha, Adv.
Mr. Anirudh Sanganeria, AOR
7
Mr. James P. Thomas, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
1. These petition(s) arise out of peculiar facts and circumstances.
2. The petitioner(s), though had completed seven semesters in their respective universities, however, on account of unfortunate situation arising out of COVID-19 Pandemic, were required to come back to India. After they returned to India, they completed the courses online and have also been granted certificate of completion of course/degree by their respective institute on or before 30th June, 2022.
3. Some of the students, who had completed their ninth semester, had approached the High Court of Madras by filing writ petition(s). The writ petition(s) were allowed by the High Court of Madras. Being aggrieved thereby, the National Medical Council of India (in short “NMC”) approached this Court.
4. This Court set aside the directions of the High Court wherein the High Court had observed that two months of clinical training alongwith 12 months of internship could be sufficient in provisional registration.
5. The Court issued the following direction: 8
i) To frame a scheme as a one time measure within two months to allow the student and such similarly situated students who have not actually completed clinical training to undergo clinical training in India in the medical colleges which may be identified by the appellant for a limited duration as may be specified by the appellant, on such charges which the appellant determines.
ii) It shall be open to the appellant to test the candidates in the scheme so farmed in the manner within next one month, which it considers appropriate as to satisfy that such students are sufficiently trained to be provisionally registered to complete internship for 12 months.
6. The Court rightly left it to the discretion of NMC, as to what should be the requisite period for undergoing the practical training.
7. In pursuance to the directions issued by this Court, the NMC notified the Scheme on 28 th July, 2022.
The Scheme reads thus:
“In pursuance to the order dated 29.04.2022 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in SLP No. 2536-37 of 2022, it is informed that the Indian students who were in the last year of their undergraduate medicine course (due to COVID-19, Russia-Ukraine war etc. had to leave their foreign medical institute and return to India) and have subsequently completed their studies as also have been granted certificate of completion of 9 course/degree by their respective institute, on or before 30th June 2022, shall be permitted to appearing Foreign Medical Graduate Examination. Thereafter, upon qualifying the FMG examination, such foreign medical graduates are required to undergo Compulsory Rotating Medical Internship (CRMI) for a period of two years to make up for the clinical training which could not be physically attended by them during the undergraduate medicine course in the foreign institute as also to familiarise them with practice of medicine under Indian conditions. The foreign medical graduates will be eligible to get registration only after completing the CRMI for two years.
The above relaxation granted to the foreign medical students is a “one time measure” and shall not be treated as”precedence in the future”.
8. The Scheme stipulates two conditions for grant of relaxation:
(i) The students who were in the last year of their undergraduate medical course and have subsequently completed their studies as also have been granted certificate of completion of course/degree.
(ii) The same should be before 30th June, 2022.
9. The cases before us are about the students who were 10 in their penultimate year of the undergraduate Medical course. Indisputably all of them have subsequently completed their studies and have also been granted certificate of completion of Course/Degree prior to the cut-off date of 30th June, 2022.
10. The only hurdle that is coming in their way is that they were not in the last year of the undergraduate medical course.
11. Smt. Aishwarya Bhati, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing on behalf of the Union of India, as well as Shri Gaurav Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the NMC, submitted that the decision of the NMC is restricting the relaxation only to the students covered by the notification dated 28th July, 2022 is on a rational basis.
12. It is submitted that in a medical course, the practical/clinical training is of utmost importance. The academic studies cannot take the colour of practical training.
13. It is also submitted that the decision of NMC has been taken after consulting the Ministry of Health, Ministry of Home and Ministry of External Affairs of the Union of India.
14. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati and Mr. Gaurav Sharma are 11 justified in observing that the Court does not possess any expertise and should not enter into the domain exclusively reserved for the experts.
15. However, there are various situations which were beyond human control. The situation like Covid-19 Pandemic has been unimaginable. It is after more than a century that such a situation has arisen and humanity had to face this crisis.
16. We find that the career of around 500 medical students who have already put in five years of study are at stake. They have already completed seven semesters of study physically and three semesters through online.
17. We are in full agreement with the NMC and Union of India that the academic training cannot substitute practical training.
18. The parents of the students must have spent a huge amount on their studies. If no solution is found, at this stage, the entire career of these students would be left in the lurch, apart from the families being put at sufferance.
19. Taking into consideration that the career of the students is at stake, we request the Union of India and the National Medical Council to address the issue at the earliest and inform the Court about a possible way out 12 to address this situation.
20. Needless to state that a very precarious situation has arisen, the students have already completed their course and now it will not be possible for them to return to these respective institutions to complete clinical training in so far as the relation between them and their respective institution is severed.
21. Another aspect that needs to be considered, is that all the students have already passed Foreign Medical Graduate Examination.
22. It is pertinent to note that various States have already accommodated such students, it is the State of Tamil Nadu and Kerala who instead of accommodating the students had requested the NMC to grant relaxation. It is a different matter that the NMC is not proposing to take action about such States who had already accommodated the students.
23. Though, we find that this is a fit case wherein some solution has to be evolved, we refrain ourself from issuing any directions.
24. However, we request the Union of India i.e. Ministry of Health, Ministry of Home and Ministry of External Affairs, in consultation with the National Medical Council, to find out a solution to address this 13 humane problem.
25. We are sure that the Union of India will give due importance to our suggestion and find out a solution for these students, who are undisputedly an asset to the nation and, particularly, when there is a dearth of Doctors in the country.
26. We request the learned Additional Solicitor General to communicate this order to the Secretaries of Ministry of Home, Ministry of Health and Ministry of External Affairs and Shri Gaurav Sharma to the National Medical Council.
27. Needless to state that a very precarious situation has arisen, the students have already completed their course and now it will not be possible for them to return back to the respective institutions to complete clinical training in so far as the relation between them and their respective institution is severed.
28. Another aspect that needs to be considered, is that all the students have already passed Foreign Medical Graduate Examination.
29. We further clarify that, if necessary, the Union of India may consider appointing a Committee in the field to find out a solution.
14
30. List these matters on 25.01.2023 at 2 p.m. (DEEPAK SINGH) (ANJU KAPOOR) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)