The matter regarding the accommodation of Indian medical students from Ukraine in Indian medical colleges was heard in the Supreme Court today, November 29. A Bench comprising Justices BR Gavai and Vikram Nath presided over the hearing and the matter was discussed in detail.
Initially, one of the counsels appearing for the petitioners urged that the least that could be done at present was providing clinical accommodations to the students of the fourth, fifth and sixth-year batches as a "one-time measure". The counsel cited a few examples of vacancies in Indian medical institutions from official records. She stated that in view of those and the fact that students were continuing their classes online, they should be allowed practical and clinical training.
However, Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati argued that providing accommodation to the Ukraine returnees was not possible since the National Medical Commission (NMC), which regulates medical education in India, had strict mandates against this. "We cannot disrupt the medical education in India," she stated. Bhati added that the NMC had already allowed the Ukraine students to opt for the academic mobility programme. The counsel appearing for the State Medical Council said further, "They have not qualified NEET. They couldn’t get admission here so they went abroad. We cannot let our patients be handled by them. Other countries have allowed them to come and practice there."
Then, another counsel appearing for the petitioners brought it to the court's notice that states like Tamil Nadu and Kerala had not even allowed the final-year Ukraine-returned students to complete their internships, while all other states had done so. He mentioned that the 2016-2021 batch particularly suffered due to this. The Bench then pulled up the State Medical Council asking why this was so if the students had qualified the FMGE (Foreign Medical Graduate Examination). The Bench also rapped the Council for taking no action even after asking for two months' time from the court to frame guidelines for the students. The counsel replied that allowing the students to pursue internships would lead to "playing with human lives" as the students only "claim" to have passed the FMGE.
The counsel for the petitioners argued that the 2015-2020 batch was allowed, but not the next one. To this, the State Council replied, "This is never-ending. After three months another batch will stand here asking for allowance. We have to stop them." However, the Bench referred to a case in Assam in which the State Council had mentioned that qualified people who did not have MBBS degrees could be hired to serve in rural areas and asked the counsel why the Ukraine-returned students could not be recruited likewise and repeated, "Why are they not being provided provisional registration?" The counsel replied, "We want qualified people, not half-qualified people."
Another counsel for a petitioner from Kerala argued that it would be a one-time measure and there were only a finite number of students from the 2021 batch. The Bench said, "Why doesn’t the union of India take a call on this? It is a humanitarian issue." ASG Bhati replied that she did not have information on the internship issue and she would come back after taking instructions. The Bench granted this.
Then, before leaving for a break, the presiding Justices consulted among themselves and stated that the internship matter would be heard separately, a decision all the counsels agreed with. After the break, the next hearing date was fixed for next Thursday, December 8.
