MP High Court Questions NMC's 2-Year Clerkship Rule, Permits 9 FMGs for NEET PG 2025

This decision by the MP High Court is seen as a critical step in addressing the grievances of FMGs who have been facing administrative and policy hurdles. It also brings into focus the need for the NMC to establish more transparent and evidence-based regulations, particularly when it comes to harmonizing global medical education standards with Indian requirements.

As the case proceeds, its outcome could potentially influence policy revisions that would affect thousands of FMGs aiming to practice in India. In a significant development, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has raised concerns over the National Medical Commission's (NMC) directive mandating a two-year clerkship for Foreign Medical Graduates (FMGs) and has granted interim relief to nine such graduates, allowing them to appear for the NEET PG 2025 examination.

According to the NMC's guidelines issued in 2021, FMGs are required to undergo a one-year internship in India after qualifying the Foreign Medical Graduate Examination (FMGE). However, confusion and complications arose for FMGs from certain countries like the Philippines, where the clinical clerkship is counted as a separate non-degree component. The NMC insisted that such students must repeat their clerkship in India, effectively extending their internship duration to two years.

This sudden change impacted the career plans of many FMGs who were ready to apply for postgraduate medical education in India. Several students argued that the extended clerkship period was arbitrary and lacked a clear academic or practical rationale.

Nine FMG students who were affected by the directive approached the Madhya Pradesh High Court seeking relief. They argued that the NMC’s decision to impose a 2-year clerkship was sudden, irrational, and detrimental to their future prospects. The petitioners requested the court to intervene and allow them to appear for the NEET PG 2025 examination.

The students emphasized that the extra year of internship delayed their progression toward specialization and also posed financial and psychological burdens. Their legal counsel further argued that there was no medical or academic justification for doubling the internship duration when their prior education already included significant clinical training.

Hearing the matter, the Madhya Pradesh High Court expressed concerns about the logic behind mandating a two-year clerkship. The court questioned the NMC on the basis of such a policy, asking for clarity and justification for why students who had already undergone clinical training abroad needed to repeat it in full.

While the matter remains under judicial review, the court granted interim relief to the nine petitioners. This means the students are now allowed to register and appear for the NEET PG 2025 examination, pending final decisions on the broader legal challenge.

This decision by the Madhya Pradesh High Court is seen as a critical step in addressing the grievances of FMGs who have been facing administrative and policy hurdles. It also brings into focus the need for the NMC to establish more transparent and evidence-based regulations, particularly when it comes to harmonizing global medical education standards with Indian requirements

As the case proceeds, its outcome could potentially influence policy revisions that would affect thousands of FMGs aiming to practice in India.

(Input from various sources)

(Rehash/Sakshi Thakar/MSM)