NORI for research: Bombay HC directs Health Ministry to considers MBBS doctors' application
Advertisement
Mumbai: The Bombay High court has instructed the Union Health and Family Welfare Ministry to reconsider the submission of twin sisters who are MBBS doctors and were seeking No Obligation to Return to India Certificate (NORI) from the authorities in order to pursue research abroad.
Both the sisters want to pursue research careers and settle down in the United States of America for which securing a NORI certificate is essential.
However, the central government has already stopped issuing the certificates to doctors as a policy measure to stop the brain drain in the face of shortage of doctors. Hence both the sisters had approached the High court seeking direction to the government.
The division bench of justice Nitin jamadar and Milind Jadhav was hearing the case of the doctors who confirmed that they did not want to continue practicing medicine in the country and rather want to pursue research outside. Previously the petitioners approached the Ministry of Education with an application for NOC to get a NORI certificate in June 2020. However, both of them got rejected because the Union Health and Family Welfare Ministry has a policy of not issuing NORI certificates to doctors.
As per a recent media report by Hindustan Times, the petitioners submitted that they have completed their MBBS courses from a private medical college in Navi Mumbai and also completed their one-year internship in 2017. But their whole family has already applied for immigration to the US and their parents and sisters have secured green cards in August and September of 2019.
The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the sisters are seeking a review of the education ministry's decision on the ground that both of them have already been engaged in temporary research assignment in the UT and want to pursue careers as researchers and not as doctors.
Learned Senior Advocates for the Petitioners pointed out a communication dated 15 May 2020 issued by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare certifying that the Petitioners are not on the Government's rolls of the doctors and have no remarks on the type of US visa the Petitioners seek to obtain from the Government of the United States.
It was the case of the Petitioners that though they have enrolled as doctors, never practiced as doctors and were engaged in full time in medical research in the United States, therefore this requirement is not applicable. On this issue, clarification from the Union of India is required.
Advocate Rajshekhar Govilkar, who appeared for the central ministry, opposed the petition on the ground that the central government has as a matter of policy decided to stop issuing NORI certificates to doctors.
HC, however, found merit in the submissions of the twin sisters, especially taking the reference of the December 2016 decision of the HC in Dr. Sunil Noothi's case, arising out of similar circumstances. The court observed that in the case:
the petitioner has obtained a degree of M.B.B.S. and has got himself registered as a practitioner under the Karnataka Medical Registration Act, 1961, he actually neither practised as a Doctor/Medical Practitioner, nor intends to practise as such. If that be so, the policy decision taken by respondent no. 1(b) of not issuing NORI certificate to any Doctor for the purpose of stemming brain drain of Doctors and to cope up with the acute shortage of Doctors in India, cannot be made applicable to the petitioner. It is obvious that even if he resides in India, he is not going to render his services to the citizens of India as a Doctor because of his inclination in research work.
In the circumstances, the refusal on the part of the respondents in issuing NORI Certificate in favour of the petitioner, making it difficult for him to prosecute his research work does not appear to be fair, reasonable and proper. The research work taken up by the petitioner is likely to help the entire mankind. Therefore, it was expected of the respondents to encourage the petitioner for doing the research work by issuing NORI Certificate instead of creating technical hurdles in his commendable research project. The Respondents are directed to reconsider the claim of the Petitioner for grant of NORI Certificate in view of the fact that he is not a Medical Practitioner and is a Research Scholar.
After considering the above case, the court found merit in the submission of the sisters and issued direction stating:
in the decision in the case of Noothi, a distinction is made between the Medical Practitioner and a Research Scholar. No contrary decision is shown to us. Considering the case made out by the Petitioners, we direct the Respondents – Ministry of Health and Family Welfare to examine the case of the Petitioners in respect of NORI Certificate in the context of the assertions of the Petitioners that the Petitioners are not the Medical Practitioners but a Research Scholars.
Previously the medical dialogues team reported that the government decided on not giving the NORI Certificates to doctors migrating abroad for further studies considering there is a large issue of vacant posts to be tackled back at home. The only exception to the rule is doctors seeking residency abroad those who are above 65 years of age. The medical fraternity of the country received a shock at the decision as the certificate is mandatory under law for doctors aspiring to study and gain work experience outside the country.
The reasoning given that the government was pointing towards the shortage of doctors in the country and the step was taken to prevent the subsequent brain drain of doctors. However, just like Dr. Noori's case in this case also the High Court considered the fact that even if the petitioners reside in India, they are not going to render services to the citizens of India as a doctor because of their inclination in research work.
Our comments section is governed by our Comments Policy . By posting comments at Medical Dialogues you automatically agree with our Comments Policy , Terms And Conditions and Privacy Policy .
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.