Dr. Thahiya Thasleem V S vs State Of Kerala

P. Krishna Kumar, J.

The appellants filed the writ petition for quashing Note 3 in Exts.P5 and P5(a)certificates issued by the fourth respondent, the Kerala State Medical Councils, and also for a declaration that the petitioners need to undergo Compulsory Rotating Medical Internship (CRMI) only for one year. By the impugned judgment, the Single Judge found that there is no illegality in the condition incorporated by Note 3 in Exts.P5 and P5(a) and thereby dismissed the writ petition.

The petitioners have undergone Master of Medicine course at Odessa National Medical University, Ukraine which is equivalent to the MBBS course in India. The duration of the course was from June 2016 to May 2022. They passed the Foreign Medical Graduate Examination in December 2022. As per the provisions of the National Medical Commission (Compulsory Rotating Medical Internship) Regulations, 2021 (‘the Regulations, 2021’, for short) which is issued by the fifth respondent, National Medical Commission, if a candidate desires to seek Permanent Registration to practice medicine in India, he has to undergo an internship on par with the Indian Medical Graduates.

The appellants contended that as per Schedule I of the Kerala Medical Practitioners Act read with Regulation 5 of the Regulations, 2021 the overall duration of CRMI shall not be less than 12 months, but it shall be completed within two years. The appellants challenge Note 3 in Exts.P5 and P5(a) on the ground that when a statutory provision stipulates only one year, the same should not be extended by an executive decision. The appellants further pointed out that pursuant to the representations made by the appellants as well as similarly placed persons, the 5th respondent issued a public notice (Ext.P8) clarifying that the students who have sufficiently compensated classes in physical onsite in lieu of online classes and have subsequently passed the examination equivalent to MBBS need to undergo only one year CRMI. The appellants have attended theory classes, practical training and examinations except one in physical mode at their University.

The 4th and 5th respondents justify the condition incorporated in the form of Note 3 in Ext.P5 and P5(a) by pointing out that it was on the basis of the directions of the Honourable Supreme Court, the Foreign Medical students are compelled to undergo CRMI for a period of 2 years to make up for the clinical training which they could not physically attend owing to the global COVID-19 pandemic situation and Ukraine war etc. Annexure R5(a) Circular dated 09/05/2023 and Annexure R5(c) public notice dated 07/06/2024 are cited by the respondents to defend the impugned order.

In the appeal, the impugned judgment is assailed on the ground that the Single Judge omitted to note that the appellants have completed their curriculum in full including practical training with 360 ECTS credits and that the petitioners were continuing in Ukraine during the entire pandemic period and they were able to attend classes and training programmes in the physical mode, whereas the Modern Medical Council decided to insist for two year internship for the Foreign Medical graduates for the reason that they might have returned to India and attended their classes only through online mode during the pandemic period.

In the light of the challenges raised by the appellants, we have carefully considered all the relevant records produced along with this appeal. As per Annexure R5(a) Circular, two year internship was required only for those Foreign Medical Graduates who were in the last year of their study and returned to India due to COVID-19 pandemic or Russian - Ukraine war etc. The said circular prescribed that after the successful completion of their course, such Foreign Medical Graduates are required to qualify Foreign Medical Graduation Examination and they have to subsequently undergo compulsory CRMI for a period of two years in a hospital attached to a Medical College. Later, as per Annexure R5(c) public notice, it was stipulated as follows:

“2. It has been observed that many FMGs are maliciously obtaining compensatory certificates from their parent Universities for the online classes carried by them. The medical profession deals with precious human life, therefore the life of Indian citizens cannot be put at stake of poorly trained medical professional. The UGMEB has decided that henceforth, Certificate regarding the compensation/supplementation of online theory subjects/classes with offline practical and clinical training shall not be accepted.

FMGs who have attended their classes online for any duration during their course completion are required to qualify the FMG Examination and subsequently undergo a Compulsory Rotating Medical Internship (CRMI) for a period of two/three years (a schedule of 12 months to be repeated) as mentioned in the Circular dated 9.5.2023 and as per the public notice uploaded on 7th December 2023.”

It may be true that the appellants had continued in Ukraine during the relevant period without returning to India. However, even as per their own admitted case, they were not able to attend the entire part of their course through physical mode. There are no unimpeachable materials before this court to ensure that they attended all the classes during the relevant period in the physical mode. The above-said Circulars were issued by the Medical Commission in the best interest of public health and to ensure that our medical professionals are well-trained, despite the fact that during the COVID-19 pandemic and the Ukraine war, most of the students were unable to pursue their professional courses properly. When the competent authority vested with the powers to regulate medical education is convinced that several Foreign Medical Graduates have maliciously obtained compensatory certificates from their parent Universities, they issued Annexure R5(c) Circular insisting that the Foreign Medical Graduates should undergo CRMI for a period of two years and that too, following the directions of the Honourable Supreme Court. The said stipulation appears to be lawful in the given circumstances.

After considering the entire relevant materials, the learned Single Judge observed as follows:

“16. Exts.P9 series certificates show that the petitioners completed their graduation in June 2022, and their course was from 2016 to 2022. Therefore, the last year of their course was one year before June 2022. Although the petitioners have contended that they did not return to India during the COVID-19 pandemic, there is no material to show that they attended classes during the pandemic period from June 2021 to June 2022 in the offline mode, which is germane. Ext.P9 certificates do not show that the petitioners had subsequently attended classes in the offline mode. Moreover, the Scrutiny Committee of the 4th respondent scrutinised Exts.R4 (b) and R4(c) communications and issued Ext.P5 series provisional registration certificates by incorporating Note 3. Thus, whether the petitioners had undergone offline mode of classes or subsequently got the online classes adequately compensated, etc., are disputed questions that cannot be adjudicated in a writ petition.”

In view of the foregoing discussion, we are in complete agreement with the above-said observations. We also find no reason to uphold the contentions raised by the appellants.

In the result, the appeal is dismissed.