"4 times you failed, then you want to appear again": CJI slams medicos for challenging NMC Regulations capping Attempts Of MBBS Prof Exams
New Delhi: While considering a plea by MBBS students seeking permission to appear in the first professional university exams after four failed attempts, the Supreme Court bench slammed the students while expressing its disappointment with the petitioners.
The matter was being considered by a bench of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, Justice PS Narasimha and Justice B Pardiwala.
Filing the plea, the petitioner MBBS students had challenged the Regulation 7.7 of Regulations on Graduate Medical Education (Amendment), 2019, which was earlier upheld by the Delhi High Court bench. The concerned regulations capped the number of attempts to clear the first year MBBS exam.
However, the CJI expressed his disappointment with the petitioner students and noted, "We are only cutting corners for education. These are doctors – four times you failed and then you want to appear again. Do your work instead of doing all of this, coming to courts for all this. Nowehere in the world would this be permitted. What kind of doctors are we going to produce?"
As per the concerned Regulation 7.7 of Regulations on Graduate Medical Education (Amendment), 2019, "No more than four attempts shall be allowed for a candidate to pass the first Professional examination. The total period for successful completion of first Professional course shall not exceed four (4) years. Partial attendance of examination in any subject shall be counted as an attempt."
Medical Dialogues had earlier reported that the Delhi High Court division bench headed by Delhi Chief Justice Satish Chander and Justice Subramonium Prasad upheld the Regulation 7.7 of Regulations on Graduate Medical Education (Amendment), 2019 by NMC and denied providing relief to the petitioners who had sought relief from the HC bench after exhausting all the four attempts to clear the MBBS first-year examination.
While considering the plea, the HC bench of Delhi Chief Justice Satish Chander and Justice Subramonium Prasad had noted that "it is evident that this Court does not have wide ranging powers to review policies under the ground of legitimate expectation. In the case at hand, as already discussed, the Petitioners did not have a legitimate expectation to get infinite opportunities to qualify in the medical examination."
However, challenging the HC order, last year five specially-abled MBBS Students, who were admitted to various medical colleges in the academic year 2019-20, moved to the Supreme Court and challenged the amendment to Regulations of Graduate Medical Examination 1997 by the National Medical Commission (erstwhile Medical Council of India).
Also Read: MBBS Students approach SC challenging NMC Regulations capping Attempts Of MBBS Prof Exams
The petitioner students argued that the amended Regulations had been implemented without complying with the provisions of Section 19A of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956. As per the 1956 Act, the Copies of the draft regulations and all the subsequent amendments have to be furnished by the Council to the State Governments. It also mandates that before submitting the regulations or amendments to the Union Government for its nod, the Council has to consider the comments of any State Governments received within a duration of three months from the furnishing of copies.
Earlier, issuing notice in the matter, the top court bench had listed it for hearing in January, 2023. As per the latest media report by Live Law, upon the plea being mentioned, the Chief Justice DY Chandrachud referred to the Regulations on Graduate Medical Education (Amendment) 2019 and observed, "The regulation prohibits you. We will hear the matter on merits. We will list it."
When the counsel pushed for a date, the CJI expressed his disappointment and observed, "Do your work instead of doing all of this, coming to courts for all this. Nowehere in the world would this be permitted."
At this outset, the counsel for the petitioner students referred to the fact that the attempts had been made by the candidates during the COVID-19 pandemic and more than 1000 students would become affected by this and they would not be able to become doctors if the plea was not considered.
"Other people also appeared in COVID and passed. I will consider and give a date," the CJI observed at this outset.
Disclaimer: This website is primarily for healthcare professionals. The content here does not replace medical advice and should not be used as medical, diagnostic, endorsement, treatment, or prescription advice. Medical science evolves rapidly, and we strive to keep our information current. If you find any discrepancies, please contact us at corrections@medicaldialogues.in. Read our Correction Policy here. Nothing here should be used as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. We do not endorse any healthcare advice that contradicts a physician's guidance. Use of this site is subject to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and Advertisement Policy. For more details, read our Full Disclaimer here.
NOTE: Join us in combating medical misinformation. If you encounter a questionable health, medical, or medical education claim, email us at factcheck@medicaldialogues.in for evaluation.