Supreme court ripped off Section 4(3) of Screening Tests Regulations
by Admin | Feb 1, 2018 | FMGE, MCI
In a landmark judgment, supreme court in Writ Petition (C) No.650/2017, ROHIT NARESH AGARWAL vs Medical council of India in which IA was filed by one Dr Malhar Gautam, Was heard by Justice Arun Mishra and Justice Amitava Roy and ripped off the controversial Section 4 (3) of Screening test Regulations of MCI.
The Order reads as “We do not find any error in the decision rendered by the High Court in declaring regulation 4(3) of the Screening Test Regulations, 2002 as ultra vires. As we have upheld the judgment of the High Court, the writ petition filed questioning the same stands allowed. The appeals filed by the Medical Council of India are dismissed”
Section 4 (3) of Screening test Regulations reads as “He/She has studied for the medical course at the same institute located abroad for the entire duration of the course from where he/she has
obtained the degree.” The following shall be added in Clause 4(3) in terms of Notification
published on 16.01.2016 in the Gazette of India. “Provided in cases where Central Government is informed of condition of war, civil unrest, rebellion, internal war or any such situation wherein life of Indian citizen is in distress and such information has been received through the Indian Embassy in that country then the Council shall relax the requirement of obtaining medical education: from the same institute located abroad in respect of which communication has been received from the Indian Embassy in that country.”
The implication of this Judgement will be that the students who have studied their MBBS from two different geographical locations of same University (Different campuses) will become eligible to write MCI Screening examination. Before this Judgement, these students were not even allowed to write FMGE/ MCI screening examination. It’s important to note that many foreign universities have different campuses and part of studies in different campus is very common outside India, especially in European Union and South East Asia
MEDICAL REPORTER
by Admin | Feb 1, 2018 | FMGE, MCI
In a landmark judgment, supreme court in Writ Petition (C) No.650/2017, ROHIT NARESH AGARWAL vs Medical council of India in which IA was filed by one Dr Malhar Gautam, Was heard by Justice Arun Mishra and Justice Amitava Roy and ripped off the controversial Section 4 (3) of Screening test Regulations of MCI.
The Order reads as “We do not find any error in the decision rendered by the High Court in declaring regulation 4(3) of the Screening Test Regulations, 2002 as ultra vires. As we have upheld the judgment of the High Court, the writ petition filed questioning the same stands allowed. The appeals filed by the Medical Council of India are dismissed”
Section 4 (3) of Screening test Regulations reads as “He/She has studied for the medical course at the same institute located abroad for the entire duration of the course from where he/she has
obtained the degree.” The following shall be added in Clause 4(3) in terms of Notification
published on 16.01.2016 in the Gazette of India. “Provided in cases where Central Government is informed of condition of war, civil unrest, rebellion, internal war or any such situation wherein life of Indian citizen is in distress and such information has been received through the Indian Embassy in that country then the Council shall relax the requirement of obtaining medical education: from the same institute located abroad in respect of which communication has been received from the Indian Embassy in that country.”
The implication of this Judgement will be that the students who have studied their MBBS from two different geographical locations of same University (Different campuses) will become eligible to write MCI Screening examination. Before this Judgement, these students were not even allowed to write FMGE/ MCI screening examination. It’s important to note that many foreign universities have different campuses and part of studies in different campus is very common outside India, especially in European Union and South East Asia
MEDICAL REPORTER
No comments:
Post a Comment