In a significant ruling by the Delhi High Court regarding MBBS admission eligibility, the court addressed the case involving the National Medical Commission and the applicant’s academic journey. The decision focused on integrity and adherence to regulations, highlighting the repercussions of deceitful practices. Stay informed about the implications of this ruling on admissions processes and academic integrity.
Facts
- Appellant was granted an eligibility certificate on 19 February, 2014 after thorough verification.
- Certificate was revoked in 2023 without proper consideration.
- Learned senior counsel argued that revocation was belated and unjust.
- Appellant’s eligibility should be reassessed with proper considerations.
Arguments
- The appellant submitted all relevant marksheets and necessary documents for the eligibility certificate application.
- The eligibility certificate was revoked based on false grounds despite the appellant clearing the screening test in 2023.
- Reference to specific regulations (GME Regulations and Regulations, 2002) highlighting the criteria for admission to MBBS courses.
- The appellant disclosed Class XII marksheet details, but the omission of pass/fail status was deemed unintentional.
- The revocation of the eligibility certificate erased over ten years of academic endeavors for the appellant.
- The appellant’s academic journey was negatively impacted by the revocation decision.
- The dismissal of the appellant’s petition based on a precedent was deemed unjust.
- The argument against equating the appellant’s case to a previous petitioner’s case.
- Counsel for National Medical Commission emphasizing the importance of passing specific subjects for joining an undergraduate medical course abroad.
- Relevance of past Supreme Court judgments in similar cases mentioned for consideration.
- Delhi Medical Council pointed out the discrepancy between the marksheet issued by CBSE and the eligibility certificate issued by NMC.
- Applicant/appellant failed in the subject of Biology which was mandatory for eligibility according to GME Regulations.
- Regulation allows for cancellation of eligibility certificate if false information is provided.
- The marksheet revealed the failure in Biology, which was not disclosed in the application form.
- The eligibility certificate was issued based on the information provided by the appellant.
Analysis
- The court noted that the appellant was ineligible for an eligibility certificate as she had not passed mandatory subjects like Physics, Chemistry, Biology, and English.
- The court criticized the tendency of courts to show leniency towards individuals who manipulate norms for personal gain.
- The court emphasized the importance of upholding the integrity of the selection process and not rewarding those who use trickery to secure advantages.
- The court highlighted the misuse of power when eligibility is attributed long after the selection process has been completed.
- The appellant’s ineligibility under regulations was not disputed, but she sought equitable jurisdiction from the court, which was not supported due to her manipulation of norms for admission.
- The judgment affirmed that admissions obtained through deceitful means could be canceled, even if a degree had already been awarded.
- Considerations of judicial policy dictate that advantage gained by illegal means should not be retained, as it would jeopardize the purity of the selection process and instigate disrespect towards the judicial system.
- Consistently, academic gains from wrongful admissions have been annulled by the court.
- The case pertained to admission to the MBBS course.
- It was observed that the candidate’s result was awaited.
Decision
- If the appellant is successful in the exam, it would constitute a new cause of action.
- The appellant can then file a fresh application with the NMC for eligibility certificate.
- The present appeal along with the applications is dismissed.
- No tie existed as Respondent 6 was ineligible.
- Authorities are directed to admit the appellant to the course within two weeks.
Case Title: PREETI SINGH Vs. NATIONAL MEDICAL COMMISSION & ORS. (2024:DHC:3829-DB)
Case Number: LPA-374/2024
