Supreme Court Questions Exemption for Private Medical Students from Rural Service

The Supreme Court of India recently deliberated on whether medical students from private institutions should be exempt from mandatory rural service. A vacation bench of Justices PS Narasimha and Sanjay Karol addressed the issue while hearing a petition filed by five MBBS students from a deemed university in Karnataka. The students sought a no-objection certificate (NOC) from the Karnataka government without the obligation of completing a one-year rural service.

Key Points from the Hearing:

• Petitioners’ Argument: The students argued that since they were studying in private seats of a deemed university, they should not be subjected to the compulsory rural service mandated by the Karnataka government. They requested the court to direct the Commissionerate, Health and Family Welfare Services, to issue the NOC without requiring an affidavit for rural service.
• Supreme Court’s Observation: The bench questioned the rationale behind exempting students from private institutions from rural service. “Just because you go and study at a private institution, you have an exemption from working in rural areas?” the bench remarked. The justices emphasized the importance of contributing to nation-building, particularly in underserved rural areas.
• Legal Background: The petition referred to the Karnataka Compulsory Service Training by Candidates Completed Medical Courses Act, 2012, and the subsequent Rules of 2015. These regulations mandate that all medical graduates, including post-graduate and super specialty candidates from government and private institutions, must complete one year of rural service to obtain permanent registration with the Karnataka Medical Council.
• Notification Challenge: The petitioners contested a July 28, 2023 notification from the Commissionerate, which included candidates from private/deemed universities in the compulsory service requirement. They argued that students from private seats, who pay significantly higher tuition fees, should be considered a distinct category under Article 14 (equality before law) of the Constitution of India, thus exempting them from the rural service mandate.

Supreme Court’s Consideration:

• Public Service Commitment: The bench underscored the value of serving in rural areas, stating, “You walk up and down India and work in different rural areas. That is such a beautiful thing to do.” The justices questioned if students from private institutions had a lesser obligation towards public service and nation-building.
• Government’s Response: The Supreme Court issued a notice to the Karnataka government and other relevant parties to respond to the petition.

Implications:

The case highlights a significant debate on public service obligations for medical graduates, regardless of their institution’s public or private status. The Supreme Court’s scrutiny reflects a broader perspective on equitable responsibilities and contributions to rural healthcare.

Conclusion:

The Supreme Court’s consideration of this case underscores the importance of rural service in medical education and the equitable application of service mandates. The outcome could set a precedent for how private medical graduates are integrated into national healthcare service requirements.

For comprehensive market coverage, business news, and real-time stock market updates, visit Kanishk Social Media.

If you like this story, share it with a friend!