The Rajasthan High Court has directed the NMC to grant a personal hearing to Dr. Shankar Kumar, a Pakistani national, regarding his admission to an MD Post-Graduate Diploma course for the 2025 academic session. Dr. Kumar had qualified the NEET PG 2024 but was denied admission due to the non-submission of certain non-pre-requisite documents within a 24-hour window.
The order was passed by Hon’ble Justice Sameer Jain in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3155/2025. Represented by Anshuman Singh Khangarot and Aditya Mishra, both Mentblue mentors, Dr. Kumar challenged the rejection under Article 226 of the Constitution, arguing that the decision was arbitrary and unconstitutional.
After hearing the parties, the Court directed the NMC, as the general regulatory body, to provide Dr. Kumar an opportunity to present his case. He must submit a detailed representation along with his petition and supporting documents to the NMC Secretary in New Delhi by March 12, 2025. The NMC has been instructed to grant him a personal hearing by March 20, 2025, and issue a final decision within seven days thereafter.
With this ruling, the petitioner retains the right to seek further legal recourse if his grievance remains unresolved.
The case highlights ongoing issues regarding the admission process for foreign nationals in Indian medical institutions, particularly concerning procedural barriers and documentation requirements.
The Supreme Court has reaffirmed that High Courts can quash FIRs at the nascent stage of investigation under Section 482 CrPC/ Section 528 BNSS if the allegations do not disclose a prima facie offence. In a recent judgment, the Court quashed an FIR against Congress MP Imran Pratapgarhi, stating that the case was a clear abuse of the legal process.
The Delhi High Court, in ๐ญ๐๐๐๐ ๐ช๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐. ๐ต.๐พ.๐ฎ.๐ฌ.๐ณ ๐ช๐๐๐๐๐ (๐จ๐น๐ฉ.๐ท. 1318/2024), ruled that when an arbitration agreement does not specify a seat or venue, the court's jurisdiction under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, must be determined based on Sections 16 to 20 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908. The ruling, delivered by Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri on March 20, 2025, emphasized that ๐ท๐๐ฟ๐ถ๏ฟฝ...
In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India in Disortho S.A.S. v. Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd. held that Indian courts have jurisdiction to appoint an arbitrator even if the arbitration venue is in a foreign country, provided the contract specifies Indian law as the governing law.