Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

3/NBE vide communications dated 16th September, 2020 and 25th November, 2020 sought clarification from the Central Government and the NMC. The respondent no. 3/NBE vide its communication dated 22nd September, 2020 informed the appellants-doctors, who were appearing in the DNB final (theory) examination in June, 2020, that they were being provisionally allowed to appear in the said examination till such time as the question of equivalence is resolved by the Central Government. 5.5 Subsequently, respondent no. 3/NBE by its decision taken in its Minutes of Meeting held on 24th December, 2020, directed that the candidates possessing FCPS qualifications shall not be allowed to appear in the DNB final examinations, till such time the clarification qua the equivalence of the FCPS qualifications with respect to the degrees awarded by the Indian Universities, is received from the Central Government. In terms of the aforesaid decision, the respondent no. 3/NBE issued the Information Bulletin on 19th January, 2021 thereby stating that the candidates possessing FCPS qualifications awarded by CPS, Mumbai are not eligible for DNB final examinations, till such time the equivalence of FCPS qualifications with MD/MS qualifications, is confirmed by the Central Government.

Subject: Equivalence of CPS qualifications to MD/MS/PG Diploma qualifications - reg.
Sir, I am directed to refer to letters No. NBE/EDO/2020/429 dated 16.09.2020 and No. NBE/EDO/2021/2012 dated 06.04.2021 on the subject mentioned above and to say that the matter of equivalence of CPS qualifications to MD/MS/PG Diploma qualifications has been examined in the Ministry and the following is hereby conveyed:

xxx xxx xxx‖ (Emphasis Supplied)

21. It is also relevant to note that in respect of equivalence of qualifications granted by CPS, Mumbai, the Central Government vide its letter dated 30th April, 2021 has clarified that the various FCPS qualifications, are registrable for medical practice, however, the said qualifications are not equivalent to either MD or MS qualifications. In this regard, the respondent no. 1/MoHFW, has categorically stated that the aforesaid letter dated 30th April, 2021 was issued as a clarification, with a view to clarify the position as regards the CPS courses that already existed. Thus, respondent no. 1/MoHFW has explained its position in the short written submissions filed on its behalf, which reads as under:-

37. The judgments relied upon by the appellants-doctors do not, in any manner, aid or assist their cases, as the same are clearly distinguishable in law and facts.

37.1 The judgment in the case of Hindustanwala Mohd. Adnan (supra) of Division Bench of Bombay High Court dealt with the issue of de-recognition of the courses run by CPS, Mumbai. It was in that context that the Division Bench of Bombay High Court had held that the notification regarding de-recognition of the said courses would operate prospectively. However, the present appeals do not deal with the issue of de-recognition of any courses. It is undisputed that the FCPS courses run by CPS, Mumbai are recognized. The said case did not deal with the issue of equivalence of FCPS qualifications with MD/MS, which is the issue in the present case. Even otherwise, there is nothing on record to show that equivalence was granted to the FCPS qualifications with MD/MS, which is sought to be withdrawn by the impugned letter/notification. Appellants, in the present appeals have not pointed out any Rule/Regulation/Notification ever granting equivalence to FCPC qualifications with MD/MS. Thus, the present is not a case of withdrawal of a benefit that was earlier conferred on the appellants. 37.2 The judgment in the case of Anita Kishan Rao Videkar (supra) of Bombay High Court dealt with a case wherein eligibility criterion was changed midway, which is not the case in the present appeals. 37.3 The judgment in the case of Suresh Pal (supra) of Supreme Court dealt with a situation where the petitioners were admitted to a course having a requisite recognition, which was later de-recognized during the time when the petitioners were still pursuing the case. This was held to be impermissible by the Supreme Court. However, in the present appeals, the courses pursued by the appellants have not been de-recognized. Only a clarification has been issued as regards the status of the course pursued by the appellants, which status already existed since recognition of the said courses by way of notification dated 22nd January, 2018 issued by the Central Government, viz. respondent no. 1/MoFHW. 37.4 Likewise, the judgment in the case of Aasawari Kiran Purohit (supra) of Bombay High Court and Geetanjali Medical College And Hospital (supra) of Rajasthan High Court, did not deal with the issue of equivalence, which is the subject matter of adjudication in the present appeals.