The Delhi High Court has recently underscored the shared accountability between candidates and examination authorities in maintaining the integrity of competitive and professional examination systems. This pronouncement was made in the case Dr Sanchari Ghosh v National Board of Exams in Medical Sciences & Anr, where Justice Jasmeet Singh upheld the cancellation of a doctor’s candidature for the National Board (FNB) Cardiac Electrophysiology fellowship.
The court’s decision followed an investigation that revealed the doctor had not met the required Doctor of National Board (DrNB) Cardiology qualification by the stipulated deadline. Despite this, she had misrepresented her eligibility to participate in the entrance exam. Consequently, the court imposed a penalty of ₹1,000 on her.
In addition, the court criticized the National Board of Examinations in Medical Sciences (NBEMS) for failing to identify the ineligibility issue until after the candidate had completed over nine months of training. For this oversight, NBEMS was subjected to a cost of ₹10,000. The judgment, delivered on August 18, emphasized the necessity for adherence to the regulations governing high-stakes examinations by both candidates and overseeing bodies.
Justice Jasmeet Singh stated, “The integrity of a high-stakes examination system is a shared responsibility. Neither can the candidates take the system for granted, nor can the system take the candidates for granted.”
The court was addressing a petition filed by Dr. Sanchari Ghosh, who contested the NBEMS’ decision to cancel her candidacy for the FNB Cardiac Electrophysiology Fellowship for the 2024 admission session. Dr. Ghosh had achieved a rank of 14 in the Fellowship Entrance Test (FET)-2024, securing a position at Narayana Hrudayalaya in Bengaluru, where she commenced the fellowship on August 18, 2025.
More Read
Under the FET-2024 guidelines, candidates were required to complete their postgraduate qualifications by December 31, 2024. However, Dr. Ghosh’s DrNB Cardiology final examination was conducted only in January 2025, with her provisional certification issued on May 29, 2025. Despite this, she had inaccurately listed December 31, 2024, as her “PG Year of Passing” during the FET application process and subsequently affirmed her eligibility.
The court concluded that Dr. Ghosh had misrepresented her qualifications on multiple occasions and was therefore not entitled to any equitable relief. Her argument that COVID-19-related delays justified her continuation was also dismissed. The court further clarified that her admission and the subsequent nine months of training did not establish a vested right, as the FET rules allowed for the cancellation of candidacy upon later discovery of ineligibility.
Critically, the court also admonished NBEMS for its failure to detect the discrepancy earlier. Dr. Ghosh had disclosed her enrollment in the three-year DrNB program on April 16, 2022, which clearly indicated her inability to meet the December 31, 2024 deadline. Despite this, NBEMS allowed her to proceed through various stages of the fellowship process.
More Read
The court stressed the critical nature of accurately administering medical examinations, noting that these tests are not merely academic exercises but pivotal determinants of professional futures, especially in the medical sector where a limited number of superspeciality seats are highly contested.
In dismissing Dr. Ghosh’s plea, the court imposed costs of ₹1,000 on her and ₹10,000 on NBEMS. The penalty against NBEMS was intended to foster greater “institutional accountability” and to highlight the importance of diligence in examination, counseling, and verification processes.
Legal representation for Dr. Sanchari Ghosh included Advocates Shivendra Singh, Ankur Sood, Kaushik Mishra, Shailesh K Rajora, Aryama Singh Rajput, Vishvajeet Singh Rana, and Deepshikha Kumar. Advocates Waize Ali Noor, Mrinal Kumar Sharma, Varun Rajawat, and Zillur Rahman appeared for NBEMS.
