CWP No. 15454 of 2009 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH
CWP No. 15454 of 2009
Date of decision July 26, 2011
Pinky Nagpal
....... Appellant
Versus
Medical Council of India and another
........Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN
Present:- Mr. Ankit Goel, Advocate for
Mr. Govind Goel, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. IPS Doabia, Advocate
for respondent No.1.
Mr. S. S. Behl, Advocate
for respondent No.2.
****
1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed
to see the judgment ? No
2. To be referred to the reporters or not? No
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the
digest?No
K. Kannan, J (oral).
1. The petitioner seeks for quashing of the order
passed by the Medical Council rejecting her plea for permanent registration
in respect of a medical degree from a Foreign University and who had
taken a qualifying screening test, on return to India. It is admitted that the
petitioner had qualified in the screening test and in order to practice it was
essential that the person had obtained a certificate of practice issued by
the Medical Council of India.
2. Along with the application for registration, the
petitioner appears to have produced a mark sheet alleged to have been
CWP No. 15454 of 2009 2
issued by the Punjab School Education Board (PSEB) that gave details of
various marks in School Board Examination in several subjects, including
the marks secured in Physics as 60. The Medical Council had sent the
document for verification with PSEB and it appears that they had been
informed that the said certificate had not been issued by PSEB at all. The
petitioner had subsequently applied and given a duplicate certificate from
PSEB that showed the marks in its certificate as 50 in Physics. To a query
from the Assistant Secretary of Medical Council of India, the PSEB had
clarified that all the particulars issued in the “duplicate detail mark card”
were correct as per records.
3. The request for permanent registration is rejected
on account of the fact that the original application given by the petitioner as
well as the mark sheet said to have been issued by PSEB made reference
to the marks in Physics as 50 which were not true and admittedly not true
by reference to the details given in the duplicate mark sheet issued by
PSEB. There is no point in hiding the fact that the petitioner had at some
point of time relied on a document which was not genuine and she had
herself given wrong details in her application. The issue is whether a
permanent registration must be denied only because that the petitioner had
previously relied on a certificate which was found to be not genuine.
Learned counsel appearing for the Medical Council argues that the
petitioner had relied on a forged document and therefore she shall not be
favoured with permanent registration. The counsel also refers to a decision
of the Delhi High Court in Sanjay Kumar Porwal Vs. UOI and another in
CWP No. 5822 of 2007 dated 10.8.2007. The Delhi High Court was
considering a case of forged mark sheet that made it appear as though the
petitioner had secured 50% marks and it turned out that it was not correct
and that a criminal case had also been registered and the case was
pending. The Court therefore said that it was not willing to make a
CWP No. 15454 of 2009 3
favourable intervention in favour of the petitioner. I shall find no use to
apply this judgment for a claim by the petitioner, since there cannot be any
disqualification for a person who has secured pass marks. If it has to be
rejected only on the ground that petitioner had earlier relied on a document
which is not genuine, I do not think it is appropriate to punish a person at all
times. If the petitioner had secured 50 marks in Physics and affirmed as
correct by PSEB. I still not find that there is a reason to take a high moral
ground to deny to the petitioner a permanent registration when she was
otherwise not disqualified. There need be no prevarication of whether it
was 60 or 50 marks in Physics, since the petitioner now admits that it was
50 and she places a reliance only on the duplicate mark sheet issued by
PSEB and affirmed by the Board to contain the correct marks as compared
with the original records.
4. I quash the impugned order and direct the Medical
Council of India to issue a Permanent Registration Certificate, if she is not
otherwise disqualified.
5. The writ petition is allowed.
(K. KANNAN)
JUDGE
July 26, 2011
archana