Four-Attempt Limit Under NMC’s GME Regulations Applies To First Professional MBBS As A Whole, Not Individual Subjects: Bombay High Court

The Court consequently dismissed a medical student’s plea seeking another opportunity to appear for the Anatomy examination after she had already made four attempts at the first-year examination.

The Court was hearing a writ petition seeking a direction to the Maharashtra University of Health Sciences to permit the student to appear for the theory and practical examinations in Anatomy after her college declined to allow another attempt.

A Bench of Justice R. I. Chagla and Justice Firdosh P. Pooniwalla observed: “Regulation 21 of the 2023 Regulations provides that, under no circumstances, the student shall be allowed more than four attempts for the first year (First Professional MBBS). It is important to note that the Regulation provides that the student shall not be allowed more than four attempts for the first year of MBBS and does not restrict the limit to attempts made in different subjects as is submitted by the Petitioner. Once this is the position, the student can be allowed only four attempts of the first year MBBS, irrespective of the subjects in which the student may have appeared in each of those attempts.”

Advocate Pooja V. Thorat appeared for the petitioner; Advocate Prasad B. Kulkarni appeared for the respondents

Background

The student was admitted to the First Year MBBS course after appearing for NEET-UG 2023. During the internal assessments, she passed all subjects but fell two marks short in Anatomy. Since candidates were required to clear their internal assessments before appearing in the university examination, she took the theory and practical examinations in the other subjects but did not appear in Anatomy.

The student was declared unsuccessful in the first university examination. She subsequently appeared in the supplementary examination and took Anatomy for the first time. Although she passed Physiology and Biochemistry, she fell four marks short in Anatomy theory, leaving it as the only subject preventing her promotion to the Second Year MBBS course. She made two further attempts in Anatomy, passing the practical component on both occasions but failing the theory examination.

When the student sought another opportunity to appear in Anatomy, the college declined permission. She contended that she had appeared in Anatomy only three times and was consequently entitled to a fourth attempt in that subject.

The student relied on Regulation 11.2.7 of the Regulations on Graduate Medical Education, 1997, as amended in 2019, which expressly stated that partial attendance at a university examination would count as an availed attempt. She argued that the omission of this stipulation from Regulation 21 of the Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2023 meant that an examination in which she had not appeared for Anatomy could not be counted as an attempt for that subject.

The respondents opposed the petition, submitting that Regulation 21 imposed a maximum of four attempts for First Professional MBBS as a whole. They argued that the limit was not separately applicable to each subject and that the student had exhausted all four permissible attempts.

Court’s Observations

The Court examined Regulation 21 of the Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2023 and found its language unambiguous. The provision restricts the number of attempts available for First Professional MBBS and does not create separate four-attempt limits for Anatomy, Physiology and Biochemistry.

Addressing the omission of the partial-attendance stipulation contained in the earlier regulations, the Court observed:

Further, the omission of the words “Partial attendance at any University examination shall be counted as an availed attempt”, which were found in Regulation 11.2.7(2) of the 1997 Regulations, from the 2023 Regulations, does not change the plain wording of Regulation 21 which clearly provides that, under no circumstances, the student shall be allowed more than four attempts for the first year (First Professional MBBS). The words used in Regulation 21 are totally clear and refer to four attempts for the first year, irrespective of the subjects that are attempted in any of these attempts, and the omission of the aforesaid words does not change that position.

The Court, therefore, rejected the student’s contention that only the examinations in which she had appeared for Anatomy could be counted against the prescribed limit. It also found it unnecessary to examine the Competency Based Medical Education Curriculum Guidelines because the dispute could be decided on the plain language of Regulation 21.

Applying Regulation 21, the Court found that the student had admittedly appeared four times in the First Professional MBBS examination. Her participation in the initial examination in Physiology and Biochemistry counted as an attempt for the first year even though she had not appeared in Anatomy.

The Court held: “Coming to the facts of the present case, the Petitioner has admittedly given four attempts of first year MBBS. In these circumstances, by virtue of the provisions of Regulation 21 of the 2023 Regulations, the Petitioner cannot be allowed one more attempt in Anatomy as sought by the Petitioner. The Petitioner has already been allowed four attempts for the first year MBBS and cannot be allowed any more attempt.”

The student also relied upon Rajkumarsingh S/o Dr. K.B. Singh v. Amravati University, Amravati and Another (1996). In that case, the student had been prevented from appearing in certain examinations because of insufficient attendance and delays in the declaration of an earlier result.

The Court found the precedent distinguishable because the present student had actually appeared in the First Professional MBBS examination in Physiology and Biochemistry. Her inability to appear in Anatomy during the same examination did not mean that the examination ceased to constitute an attempt for the first year.

The Court observed: “On the other hand, in the present case before us, the Petitioner actually appeared for the first year MBBS examination in Physiology and Biochemistry, and, therefore, that would definitely be counted as one of the four attempts made by the Petitioner. For all these reasons, the Judgement in Rajkumarsingh (Supra) does not come to the aid of the Petitioner.”

Conclusion

The High Court dismissed the writ petition and declined to direct the Maharashtra University of Health Sciences to permit the student to make another attempt in Anatomy. It made no order as to costs.

Cause Title: Aarya Avinash Patil v. Maharashtra University of Health Sciences, Nashik and Others (2026:BHC-AS:35540-DB)

Appearances

Petitioner: Advocate Pooja V. Thorat, with Advocate Aman Bodke, instructed by Advocate A. Qoreshi

Respondents: Advocate Prasad B. Kulkarni; Advocate Ganesh Gole; Advocate Amar Bodke

Click here to read/download Judgment