ORDER : 1. The instant writ petition has been preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the following prayers:- “A] By an appropriate writ order or direction, the respondent the National Medical Commission of India may be directed to immediately issue the Eligibility Certificate to the petitioner ignoring the age of petitioner at the time of his taking admission for MBBS course. B] By an appropriate writ order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to allow the petitioner to participate in the FMGE screening test and thereafter declare the result of the FMGE Screening test, so as to enable him to pursue further study and practice as a Doctor in India. C] Any other appropriate order which is deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be also passed in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Brief facts of the case are that the Date of Birth of the petitioner is 02.05.1999. He aspired to become a Doctor and thus, after passing his Secondary and Senior Secondary Examination in the year 2013 and 2015, took admission in ‘V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, Ukraine’ through an agent in the year 2015. The Board of Secondary Education, Rajasthan, declared the petitioner as passed in Secondary Examination when the petitioner was 14 years of age and had also declared the petitioner as passed in Senior Secondary, when he was 16 years of age. 3. The requirement of obtaining Eligibility Certificate was dispensed with by the Indian Medical Council (Amendment) First and Second Ordinance, 2013. The Executive of the Council decided to restart issuance of Eligibility Certificate w.e.f. the Academic Year i.e. 2016-2017 for which, a public notice dated 07.10.2013 was issued. 4. The 'V.N. KARAZIN KHARKIV NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, Ukraine' is among World Top 500 Universities, as on now ranking 477 as per QS World University Rankings 2021. It is a recognized University by National Medical Commission of India. The qualification acquired from the aforesaid university is considered as a recognized qualification and the student who pass the exam from the aforesaid university after passing the Foreign Medical Graduation Examination (hereinafter referred as 'FMGE") Screening Test, can pursue further studies and can be registered as a medical practitioner in India. 5. The qualification acquired from the aforesaid university is considered as a recognized qualification and the student who pass the exam from the aforesaid university after passing the Foreign Medical Graduation Examination (hereinafter referred as 'FMGE") Screening Test, can pursue further studies and can be registered as a medical practitioner in India. 5. The aforesaid University, after duly scanning the documents as per their eligibility criteria for admission, admitted the petitioner in their University and allowed him to complete the medical course. The petitioner completed the six years course successfully from 'V.N. KARAZIN KHARKIV NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, Ukraine' which is equivalent to MBBS course in India. The Indian Embassy, after proper examination, perusal of the documents and the degree awarded by 'V.N. KARAZIN KHARKIV NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, Ukraine', awarded the petitioner with a degree equivalent to the qualification acquired by the petitioner from the aforementioned University. 6. As the petitioner after passing the higher education in "Academic Degree of Medical Doctor" from 'V.N. KARAZIN KHARKIV NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, Ukraine', was desirous to become a doctor in India and also aspires to take up further studies of post-graduation in India itself, therefore, he is required to participate in the examination conducted by the National Board of Examinations for the Foreign Medical Graduate Examination Screening Test. But the same is possible only when he would have eligibility certificate issued by the National Medical Commission. Earlier there was offline system for applying for the Eligibility Certificate but recently the online system has been introduced for applying for the Eligibility Certificate. When the petitioner applied online his form is not being accepted with the remark of incorrect age. More clearly to say that the same is not being accepted for the reason that petitioner was below 17 years of age at the time of his admission for MBBS course. The petitioner thereafter, approached the respondent authorities but no satisfactory answer was given by them. 7. The respondents have published the program for conducting of the FMGE screening test which is scheduled to be conducted on 12.12.2021. The respondents recently issued the Public Notice regarding Eligibility Certificate for Foreign Medical Graduate whereby program has been prescribed for issuance of the Eligibility Certificate. 8. It is relevant to mention here that Ukraine Embassy/ Ukraine Government allows the students below the age of 17 years to undergo the Medical Course for becoming a Medical Doctor. The respondents recently issued the Public Notice regarding Eligibility Certificate for Foreign Medical Graduate whereby program has been prescribed for issuance of the Eligibility Certificate. 8. It is relevant to mention here that Ukraine Embassy/ Ukraine Government allows the students below the age of 17 years to undergo the Medical Course for becoming a Medical Doctor. There is no rule in regard to minimum age for pursuing the Medical Course and no age criteria have been prescribed in this regard by the University at Ukraine. Had it been so, by the university at Ukraine, the petitioner would have been declared as ineligible by the 'V.N. KARAZIN KHARKIV NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, Ukraine' for pursuing the medical course. 9. The certificate of National Medical Commission can be obtained at any time, as the same was not a mandatory condition while joining the course in 'V.N. KARAZIN KHARKIV NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, Ukraine' in the year 2015. The Ukraine Government issued various certificates in relation to the petitioner regarding his character, migration etc. 10. The degree obtained by the petitioner in Ukraine is equivalent to MBBS degree in India and without issuance of the certificate by the National Medical Commission of India, the petitioner would not be able to participate in FMGE Screening test conducted by National Board of Examinations and as a result of which, the petitioner would not be entitled to do internship and to pursue his further higher study and the medical degree acquired by him from the University of Ukraine shall be of no use of the petitioner. Being aggrieved of the aforesaid circumstances, the petitioner prefers the instant writ petition. 11. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Government of India itself has granted equivalence to the degree/ diploma obtained from 'V.N. KARAZIN KHARKIV NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, Ukraine' and the petitioner acquired this qualification after undergoing the course of six years. Thus, the valuable years of petitioner's youth and time period of six years devoted in pursuing the course cannot be declared to be useless merely on technical ground. 12. The requirement of obtaining Eligibility Certificate was dispensed with by the Indian Medical Council (Amendment) First and Second ordinance 2013. The Executive of the Council has decided to restart issuance of Eligibility Certificate w.e.f. the Academic year i.e., 2016-2017. 13. 12. The requirement of obtaining Eligibility Certificate was dispensed with by the Indian Medical Council (Amendment) First and Second ordinance 2013. The Executive of the Council has decided to restart issuance of Eligibility Certificate w.e.f. the Academic year i.e., 2016-2017. 13. The petitioner is a meritorious student and entitled to receive eligibility certificate from the respondent National Medical Commission but denial in issuing the eligibility certificate for the reason that the petitioner was below 17 years when he started his study for becoming a doctor cannot be said to be just and logical action on the part of the respondents. 14. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the future of the petitioner would be seriously jeopardized because if the required eligibility certificate is not issued in favour of the petitioner, then he will be deprived from pursuing further study and to practice as a Doctor in India, for which he has put in hard labour and devoted valuable time and money for pursuing the higher study. Looking to the aforesaid circumstances of the petitioner, i.e., he was minor and the admission was given by the University at Ukraine, the respondents are required to issue eligibility certificate to the petitioner to enable him to pursue his higher study and practice as a doctor in India. 15. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the lacuna lies with the respondents itself because if they are strict in regard to the minimum age then they should not have recognized the courses from other universities, who did not follow their age criteria, whereas the respondents themselves have recognized the university and if a candidate has acquired qualification from a recognized university and that university does not have requirement of having minimum age of 17 years for pursuing the course then imposing such a condition with regard to minimum age is highly unjust, arbitrary and illegal because it was the recognized university which allowed the candidate like the petitioner to pursue the course. The very purpose of screening a student, granting him eligibility certificate is to test his knowledge and aptitude of the student. The respondent by denying eligibility certificate are restraining him to pursue his further higher study and practice as a doctor is highly unreasonable and harsh. 16. The very purpose of screening a student, granting him eligibility certificate is to test his knowledge and aptitude of the student. The respondent by denying eligibility certificate are restraining him to pursue his further higher study and practice as a doctor is highly unreasonable and harsh. 16. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance upon the judgment in the case of Thakra Ram V/S Union of India (SBCWP No. 10943/2015) decided on 10.08.2017. He also submitted that the Hon'ble Division Bench also upheld the Order dated 10.08.2017, when the Respondents preferred D.B.C.S.A.W. No. 455/2018. Moreover, various other High Courts also protected the rights of petitioner like persons i.e. in the case of Jishalakshi Embrandiri V/S Medical Council of India & Ors. decided on 5.4.2006 wherein the Hon'ble Delhi High Court was pleased to direct Medical Council of India to grant registration to the petitioner to practice as a Doctor in India on his clearing the screening test. Operative para 15 of the judgment dated 5.4.2006 is quoted as under for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court:- "15. In Sudesh Kumar Singh [WP (C) No.4488/2006], the petitioner had already been allowed to appear in the Screening Test in October, 2003 and thereafter, in September, 2005. Unfortunately for him, he has not succeeded in clearing the Test. On his applying for the third time ir March, 2006, he has been informed by the National Board of Examination that since he had not completed the 17 years of age on 1.9.1995 he did not fulfill the eligibility criteria for registration as a Medical Practitioner in India. There is no controversy that the College which he had attended, namely, Saint Petersburg State Medical Academy stands duly recognized by the MCI. After hearing counsel for the parties, Interim orders had been passed on 24.03.2006 permitting him to appear in the Screening Test Scheduled for 26.03.2006. In the course of those hearing the only objection which had been articulated was that the petitioner had not attained the age of 17 years at the relevant time. This petitioner, therefore, finds himself in the same position as the foregoing Sunil Kumar and is entitled to the same treatment. In the course of those hearing the only objection which had been articulated was that the petitioner had not attained the age of 17 years at the relevant time. This petitioner, therefore, finds himself in the same position as the foregoing Sunil Kumar and is entitled to the same treatment. The MCI is accordingly directed to grant registration to the petitioner to practice as a Doctor in India on hid clearing the Screening Test." Thus, in the light of above verdict of the Hon'ble Courts, the petitioner is also entitled to have eligibility /registration certificate from the MCI. Learned counsel for the petitioner also placed reliance on the judgment dated 13.03.2020 in W.P. No. 27709/2018, titled as D. Sasirekha Vs The Assistant Secretary, Medical Council of India passed by the Hon'ble Madras High Court whereby the Hon’ble High Court extended the relief to petitioner who was also below 17 years at the time of admission in MBBS Course. 17. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance upon the judgment passed by Hon’ble High Court of Manipur in the case of Loitongban Bimolchandra Singh Vs. Rajiv Kumar & Anr. reported in AIR Online 2021 MPR 76, relevant portion of which is reproduced hereunder:- “8. One of the aspects which had been considered by the aforesaid High Courts, was the number of days/ months which were in short in completing the age of 17 years by the petitioners therein. It may further be noted that the regulation 4 which is very clear and unambiguous, provides that no candidate can be allowed to be admitted to the 1 year of MBBS course until he/she has completed the age of 17 years on or before 31 December of the year of admission to the MBBS course. Therefore, if the age of the candidate is less than 17 years, it will make no difference whether the shortage thereof is in respect of either the days or the months because the legal effect will remain the same for the reason that all the candidates who are less than 17 years at the time of their admissions, are similarly situated and are in the same footing requiring equal treatments amongst them. In the present case, the petitioner's son got admission for undergoing medical course as per the letter dated 24-04-2014 issued by the Orel State University Medical Institute, Ministry of Education of Russian Federation. After his son having joined the medical course, the petitioner applied for grant of eligibility certificate under Section 13(4B) of the Act, 1956 vide his application dated 24-09-2019 which was rejected by the MCI on the ground that his son's age was below 17 years at the time of his admission to the MBBS course in the year 2014 and therefore, he is not entitled to grant of eligibility certificate. The petitioner's son might have, by now, completed the medical course and in case the eligibility certificate is not granted to the petitioner's son, his dream of being a doctor will stand shattered and his educational standard will remain at 12 standard only. In other words, his hard work will be rendered futile and meaningless, if he is not granted the eligibility certificate. If he wishes to prosecute his further studies now, he will have to start from 12 standard afresh and in such an event, he may suffer heart-break or it may cause heart-burn. This Court is not oblivious of the fact that the regulations framed by the MCI are mandatory, as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. But the denial of a similar relief to the present petitioner which has been granted to the petitioners therein by the other High Courts, can be said to be unfair and unreasonable. Therefore, this Court has no option but to give indulgence to the present petitioner by granting a similar relief. On top of that, the case of the petitioner's son is the only case which has been brought to the notice of this Court. In other words, there appears to be no any other person in the State, other than the petitioner's son, having such a problem. In any case, it is the MCI which might be having information about it. In fact, it is not the fault of the MCI but the lack of enforcement of such a provision of law by the various Boards which conducted 10 and 12 examinations, has led to such a problem in the country. 9. In any case, it is the MCI which might be having information about it. In fact, it is not the fault of the MCI but the lack of enforcement of such a provision of law by the various Boards which conducted 10 and 12 examinations, has led to such a problem in the country. 9. In view of the above and for the reasons sated hereinabove, the instant writ petition is allowed and consequently, the impugned letter dated 30-01-2020 issued by the Assistant Secretary, MCI is quashed and set aside with the direction that the MCI/ Board of Governors in supersession of the Medical Council of India shall grant an eligibility certificate to the petitioner's son within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and order. It is made clear that this judgment and order shall not set a precedent. There shall be no order as to costs.” 18. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance upon the judgment passed by Hon’ble High Court of Madras, in the case of D. Sasirekha Vs. The Assistant Secretary, Medical Council of India in W.P.Nos.27709/2018 connected with 3224/2018, relevant portion of which is reproduced hereunder:- “14. In the result, the impugned letter of the respondent dated 06.04.2016 is hereby quashed and there shall be a direction to the respondent to issue the eligibility certificate to the petitioner within a period of three(3) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order to enable the petitioner to register herself with the Medical Council of India. 15. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner had also written the Screening Test conducted by the National Board of Examination and the result has been withheld due to the non production of the eligibility certificate. It is open to the petitioner to produce the eligibility certificate as and when the certificate is issued by the Medical Council of India and thereafter, the result shall be published. 16. In the result, this Writ Petition is allowed. No costs.” 19. Learned counsel for the petitioner also places reliance upon the judgment passed by this Court in DBSAW No.455/2018 titled as Medical Council of India Vs. 16. In the result, this Writ Petition is allowed. No costs.” 19. Learned counsel for the petitioner also places reliance upon the judgment passed by this Court in DBSAW No.455/2018 titled as Medical Council of India Vs. Thakra Ram & Anr., relevant portion of which is reproduced hereunder:- “After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, it emerges from the facts and finding of learned Single Judge that the writ-petitioner/respondent No.1 was less than 17 years of age on the date of admission, however, he was granted admission at Ukraine, Where he has spent his valuable years for study commencing from 2008 to 2014 and acquired the qualification, which is equivalent to MBBS and recognized by the MCI. There is no dispute that the and respondent No.1/writ-petitioner obtained degree, so also, was declared successful in the Screening Test but MCI refused to grant him eligibility certificate solely on the ground that he had no completed 17 years of age. The learned Single Judge while taking a lenient view of the fact that now he has acquired the qualification and declared successful in the Screening Test, therefore, it is a case in which MCI is required to issue eligibility certificate for registration as Medical Practitioner. In our opinion, the learned Single Judge exercised its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. As per Article 226 of the Constitution of India, there is jurisdiction of the High Courts to exercise power, if the conscious of the writ courts is satisfied that justice has not been done. Here in this case, there is no doubt that as per the age criteria provided in the Regulations, a candidate must be of 17 years of age, but in this particular case, admission was obtained by the writ petitioner when he was only 16 years and 6 months of age and completed the course and passed the same, therefore, the learned Single Judge exercised its jurisdiction so as to secure ends of justice on the basis of equity and, therefore, it is not proper to interfere in the order impugned passed by the learned Single Judge. Consequently, the instant special appeal is hereby dismissed. Consequently, the instant special appeal is hereby dismissed. However, it is made clear that this judgment shall not be treated to be precedent in future.” Learned counsel for the petitioner thus, urged, that the respondents should be directed to issue Eligibility Certificate to the petitioner at the time of his taking admission for MBBS Course and the respondents may be directed to allow the petitioner to participate in the FMGE screening test and declare the result of the same to enable the petitioner to pursue further studies and practice as a Doctor in India. 20. Mr. Mukesh Rajpurohit, learned Dy.S.G. assisted by Ms. Dimple Rajpurohit, Advocate, submits that the petitioner since, is ineligible as he does not fulfill the criteria of having attained 17 years of age, cannot be issued the eligibility certificate. He also submits that as per the Medical Council of India Regulations on Graduate Medical Education, 1997, amended upto May 2018, mandates that the candidate shall have to complete the age of 17 years on or before 31st December of the year of Admission in the MBBS and the same is reproduced as under:- “4. Admission to the Medical Course-Eligibility Criteria: No candidate shall be allowed to be admitted to the Medical Curriculum proper of first Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery course until he /she has qualified the National Eligibility Entrance Test, and he/she shall not be allowed to appear for the National Eligibility-Cum- Entrance Test until: (1) He/she shall complete the age of 17 years on or before 31 December of the year of admission to the MBBS. (IA) He/She has obtained a minimum of marks in National Eligibility-Cum- Entrance Test as prescribed in Clause 5 of Chapter II. (IB) Provided further that in order to be eligible, the upper age limit for candidates appearing for National Eligibility Entrance Test and seeking admission to MBBS programme shall be 25 years as on the date of examination with a relaxation of 5 years for candidates belonging to SC/ST/OBC category and persons entitled for reservation under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.” 21. He submits that the petitioner has not given a challenge to the aforementioned regulation and thus, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed on this ground and no relaxation can be given to the petitioner. 22. Learned Dy.S.G. Mr. He submits that the petitioner has not given a challenge to the aforementioned regulation and thus, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed on this ground and no relaxation can be given to the petitioner. 22. Learned Dy.S.G. Mr. Mukesh Rajpurohit, placed reliance upon the judgment passed by Hon’ble High Court of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh in W.P.No.6536/2018 titled as Halavath Sravanthi Vs. Union of India & Ors., operative portion of the said judgment is reproduced hereunder:- “xxxxxxxx. 2. xxxxxxx. 3. The issue raised in this writ petition is covered by at least two decisions of two different Division Benches of this Court, one of which one of us (VRS,J) was a party, The decisions are Master Alli Sal Deepak v. Government of Andhra Pradesh', Tekula Samhitha Reddy and Anr. V. Union of India and Anr. and Kandula Yamini Saraswathi v. The Union of India'. Therefore, however much we sympathised for the petitioner no relief can be granted to the petitioner. Hence the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. 4. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending in this writ petition, if any, shall stand closed.” 23. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 24. It is an admitted position that the petitioner at the time of joining MBBS Course at V.N. KARAZIN KHARKIV NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, Ukraine', had not completed 17 years of age and his age was 16 years four months (approx.) and in the Regulations of 1997, the requirement for the candidate for taking admission to the Medical Curriculum proper of First Bachelor of Medicine and bachelor of Surgery course is minimum 17 years of age on or before 31st December from the year of admission to the MBBS Course. 25. It is not a case where the petitioner has concealed his credentials about the age that he was having at the time when he was given admission to the MBBS Course, The petitioner was duly given admission in the MBBS Course at V.N. KARAZIN KHARKIV NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, Ukraine' after scrutiny of all the requisites furnished by the petitioner including the document pertaining to his Date of Birth i.e. 02.05.1995. The petitioner was given admission in the year 2015 at V.N. KARAZIN KHARKIV NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, Ukraine' and ultimately, the petitioner has completed six years of MBBS Course, which is equivalent to the MBBS Course in India and duly recognized by Respondents. 26. The petitioner was given admission in the year 2015 at V.N. KARAZIN KHARKIV NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, Ukraine' and ultimately, the petitioner has completed six years of MBBS Course, which is equivalent to the MBBS Course in India and duly recognized by Respondents. 26. After completing the said course, the petitioner had applied for the eligibility certificate before the respondents in light of notice dated 15.03.2022, however, the petitioner has been denied eligibility certificate on the ground that the petitioner does not fulfill the minimum eligibility of having attained the age of 17 years. The respondents had issued a public notice dated 07.10.2013 by which, the requirement of the eligibility certificate was dispensed with by the Indian Medical Council (Amendment First and Ordinance Second, 2013). In the said public notice, the executive of the Council decided to restart issuance of the eligibility certificate w.e.f. Academic Year, 2016-2017 however, the petitioner took admission in the medical course in the Academic Year 2015-2016 when the requirement of obtaining eligibility certificate stood dispensed with and was revived for the Academic Session 2016-2017, thus, the petitioner was under the impression that he would not be required to obtain the eligibility certificate as he had taken admission in the medical course in the Academic Session 2015-2016 and therefore, the mandatory requirement of having minimum age of 17 years at the time of admission would not be an impediment for him. 27. It is an admitted position that if the petitioner is not issued eligibility certificate on account of completion of the aforesaid course, then, the petitioner would not be able to participate in the Foreign Medical Graduates Examination and would not be issued the due license to practice and the course undergone by the petitioner at V.N. KARAZIN KHARKIV NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, Ukraine' would be a futile exercise and the period of six years spent by petitioner as well as his efforts would be in vain. The petitioner has completed his course of six years and he was only falling short of 180 days (approx.), in having attaining the age of 17 years. 28. This court is conscious of the judgment dated 08.03.2018 passed by Hon’ble Division Bench in the case of Medical Council of India v. Thakra Ram, (DB Spl. Appeal Writ No. 455/2018), Hon’ble High Court of Manipur in the case of Loitongban Bimolchandra Singh Vs. Rajiv Kumar & Anr. 28. This court is conscious of the judgment dated 08.03.2018 passed by Hon’ble Division Bench in the case of Medical Council of India v. Thakra Ram, (DB Spl. Appeal Writ No. 455/2018), Hon’ble High Court of Manipur in the case of Loitongban Bimolchandra Singh Vs. Rajiv Kumar & Anr. reported in AIR Online 2021 MPR 76 and Hon’ble High Court of Madras D. Sasirekha Vs. The Assistant Secretary, Medical Council of India in W.P.Nos.27709/2018 connected with 3224/2018, thus, looking to the peculiar fact and circumstances of the case, and the fact that it would be too harsh for the petitioner to deny him the eligibility certificate after the petitioner has put in so much of effort, the writ petition deserves to be allowed, particularly looking to the fact that there was no benchmark prescribed by the university of Ukraine at the time of admission been given to the petitioner in the Medical Course of having attained minimum 17 years of age. 29. The respondent authorities are directed to issue petitioner the eligibility certificate within a period of ‘one month’ from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. The respondents are further directed to permit the to enable the petitioner to appear in the Foreign Medical Graduate Examination, as and when held and declare the result as well. 30. Stay application as well as all other pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.