By Express News Service
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday held that students who have pursued MBBS from a foreign medical institute cannot be granted provisional registration to complete their internship in India without completing the entire duration of clinical training.
However, in view of a large number of Indian medical students coming back from abroad because of the pandemic and the Ukraine crisis, the apex court directed the National Medical Commission to frame a scheme as a one-time measure within two months to allow them and 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 NMC for a limited duration specified by it, on charges determined by it.
“It shall be open to the appellant (NMC) to test the candidates in the scheme so framed in the manner within the 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,” the bench said.
The top court has said that without practical training, there cannot be any doctor who is expected to take care of the citizens of the country.
The top court has given the judgement on a plea filed by the National Medical Commission against a Madras HC order that said that instead of three months of clinical training in China, two months training would be sufficient for provisional registration apart from the 12 months of internship.
The facts leading to the present appeals are that the student and other similarly situated students after qualifying the eligibility test i.e. as per the Eligibility Requirement for taking Admission in an Undergraduate Medical Course in a Foreign Medical Institution Regulations, 2002 joined medical colleges in China.
It was the stand of the students that they have undergone nine semesters of their academic course including clinical training on the campus. However, due to the outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic, the clinical training for the subjects of Ophthalmology, Otorhinolaryngology and Nuclear Medicine in the 10th semester was done online and that they have been granted degree of Bachelor of Medicine & Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) after qualifying in all the subjects as per the teaching plan till May 2020 by the foreign institute.
According to the student, she has been declared qualified by the foreign institute. The only requirement before provisional registration is qualifying in the Screening Test in terms of the Screening Test Regulations, 2002. As she has qualified such a screening test, therefore, the condition in the statute read with the screening regulations stands satisfied. Hence, the decision of the Medical Council not to grant provisional registration is not justified in law.
The bench has observed that qualifying in the screening regulations is no proof of the clinical experience, if any, gained by the students.
It added that the screening examination is based upon Optical Mark Reader (OMR) answers and has no correlation with any practical training.
“We do not find that in terms of the screening regulations, the students are entitled to provisional registration,” the order reads.
Senior advocate Vikas Singh appearing for the National Medical Commission contended that in terms of the statutory regulations, the student has to study the medical course in the same institute located abroad for the “entire duration”.
The argument is that clinical training cannot be imparted through online mode as it is the actual training involving diagnosis and interactions with the patients.
“There cannot be any online clinical training which will satisfy the requisite condition of the screening regulations,” he said.
