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