Bombay High Court Denies MBBS Student Fifth First-Year Attempt; Holds Partial Examination Appearance Counts Toward Four-Attempt Limit Under 2023 Medical Education Regulations
Bombay High Court Refuses Extra Anatomy Attempt to MBBS Student; Holds Four-Attempt Cap Applies to First-Year Examination, Not Separately to Each Subject
Facts
The petitioner, Aarya Avinash Patil, was admitted to the First Year MBBS course at Vedantaa Institute of Medical Sciences after appearing for NEET-UG 2023. She passed her internal assessments in all subjects except Anatomy, where she fell short by two marks. Since passing the internal assessment was necessary to become eligible for the corresponding university examination, she appeared in the August 2024 First Year MBBS examination in the other subjects but not Anatomy.
She subsequently appeared for the Anatomy theory and practical examination in October 2024, but failed the theory paper by four marks while passing the other first-year subjects. Anatomy therefore remained the only pending subject for her promotion to Second Year MBBS.
She appeared again in Anatomy in September 2025 and December 2025. Although she passed the practical component, she failed the theory paper on both occasions. According to her, she had therefore attempted Anatomy only three times.
When she sought permission to appear once again in August 2026, the College refused on the ground that she had already exhausted the maximum permissible number of attempts for First Year MBBS. She challenged that refusal before the Bombay High Court and sought a direction permitting her to appear again for Anatomy.
Issues
The principal issues were:
- Whether Regulation 21 of the Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2023 limits a student to four attempts for the entire First Professional MBBS examination or allows four attempts separately for each subject.
- Whether the petitioner’s August 2024 examination, in which she appeared in Physiology and Biochemistry but not Anatomy, constituted one of the four permissible First Year MBBS attempts.
- Whether omission from the 2023 Regulations of the earlier phrase “Partial attendance at any University examination shall be counted as an availed attempt” meant that partial examination appearance could no longer be counted.
- Whether the earlier Bombay High Court judgment in Rajkumarsingh v. Amravati University supported the petitioner’s case.
Petitioner’s Arguments
The petitioner relied on the distinction between the old 1997 Regulations and the Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2023.
Under Regulation 11.2.7(2) of the earlier regime, four attempts were available to clear the First Professional examination and the provision expressly stated that partial attendance at any university examination would count as an availed attempt.
The petitioner argued that this specific phrase had been omitted from Regulation 21 of the 2023 Regulations. Regulation 21 merely states that a student cannot be allowed more than four attempts for First Year MBBS and cannot continue the undergraduate medical course beyond nine years from admission.
Accordingly, she argued that her August 2024 examination should not count for Anatomy because she was not eligible to appear for that subject at the time. Since she had actually taken the Anatomy examination only three times, she claimed entitlement to one further attempt.
She also relied upon the Bombay High Court decision in Rajkumarsingh S/o Dr. K.B. Singh v. Amravati University.
Respondent’s Arguments
MUHS, the National Medical Commission and the medical college opposed the petition.
They argued that Regulation 21 clearly prohibits more than four attempts for First Year MBBS as a whole. The limitation is not subject-specific.
According to the respondents, omission of the earlier expression relating to partial attendance did not alter the operative meaning of Regulation 21. Once the petitioner had appeared in the First Year MBBS examination, even if only in some subjects, that appearance constituted one attempt.
They therefore maintained that she had already exhausted all four permissible First Year MBBS attempts and could not be granted another opportunity merely because Anatomy remained uncleared.
The respondents also argued that Rajkumarsingh was factually distinguishable.
Analysis of the Law
The Court focused primarily on the plain language of Regulation 21 of the Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2023.
The provision states that:
under no circumstances shall a student be allowed more than four attempts for First Year (First Professional MBBS).
The High Court held that the wording refers to attempts for the First Year MBBS examination as a whole, rather than providing four separate attempts for every individual subject.
Accordingly, once a student participates in a First Year MBBS examination, that examination constitutes an attempt irrespective of whether the student appears in all or only some of the subjects.
The Court specifically rejected the petitioner’s argument that only examinations in which she actually appeared for Anatomy should be counted.
Effect of Omission of “Partial Attendance” Clause
The Court also considered the fact that the 1997 Regulations expressly stated that partial attendance would count as an attempt, whereas the 2023 Regulations omitted that phrase.
It held that the omission made no substantive difference.
Regulation 21 itself clearly imposes a ceiling of four attempts for First Year MBBS. The words are sufficiently clear and do not confine the attempt count to separate subjects. Therefore, absence of the old “partial attendance” wording did not permit a student to exclude an examination merely because one particular subject was not attempted.
Precedent Analysis
Rajkumarsingh S/o Dr. K.B. Singh v. Amravati University, 1996 (2) Mh.L.J. 627
The petitioner relied upon Rajkumarsingh, where the Court had considered an ordinance restricting a First MBBS student after four consecutive examinations.
In that case, the student had been unable to appear for certain examinations because he was detained for lack of requisite attendance and therefore had not even been admitted to those examinations. The Court held that such examinations could not be counted against him.
The earlier Court had also applied the maxim lex non cogit ad impossibilia—the law does not compel a person to do what is impossible—because circumstances outside the student’s control had prevented him from appearing.
The present Division Bench distinguished that decision.
Here, Aarya Patil had actually appeared in the First Year MBBS university examination in Physiology and Biochemistry in August 2024. Therefore, unlike the student in Rajkumarsingh, she had actually availed an examination attempt.
The precedent therefore did not assist her.
Court’s Reasoning
The Court found that the petitioner had admittedly participated in four First Year MBBS examinations.
Her argument proceeded on the assumption that the attempt limit had to be counted separately for Anatomy. The Court rejected that interpretation because Regulation 21 speaks of four attempts “for first year (First Professional MBBS)”, not four attempts for each individual subject.
Consequently, the August 2024 examination counted as an attempt even though she was not eligible to appear in Anatomy and appeared only in Physiology and Biochemistry.
The later three examinations in which she actually attempted Anatomy, when added to that August 2024 examination, meant that she had exhausted the permissible four First Year MBBS attempts.
The Court therefore held that MUHS and the College had correctly refused to permit another attempt.
Conclusion
The Bombay High Court held that Regulation 21 of the 2023 Graduate Medical Education Regulations imposes a maximum of four attempts for First Professional MBBS as a whole, regardless of which subjects are actually taken in each examination.
Since the petitioner had already appeared in four First Year MBBS examinations, she could not claim an additional attempt merely because Anatomy had been attempted only three times.
The Court therefore dismissed the writ petition, with no order as to costs.
Case Details
Case: Aarya Avinash Patil v. Maharashtra University of Health Sciences, Nashik & Others
Court: High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Civil Appellate Jurisdiction
Case Number: Writ Petition No. 7366 of 2026
Judge: Justice R.I. Chagla and Justice Firdosh P. Pooniwalla
Date: 31 August 2026
Result: Writ Petition dismissed; petitioner denied any further First Year MBBS/Anatomy attempt after exhausting the four-attempt limit; no order as to costs.
