Withdrawal of MSMER, 2023
- Recent decision: The National Medical Commission (NMC) has denotified and withdrawn the Maintenance of Standards of Medical Education Regulations (MSMER), 2023, weakening the framework for penalising violations of educational standards and infrastructure requirements in medical colleges.
- Penalties removed: MSMER provided for fines of up to ₹5 lakh on faculty members and administrators for submitting false information.
- Existing institutional penalties: The Medical Assessment and Rating Board (MARB) retains the power to impose fines of up to ₹1 crore on institutions under the Establishment of Medical Institutions, Assessment and Rating Regulations, 2023.
- NMC’s justification: MSMER created a parallel institutional evaluation mechanism for undergraduate and postgraduate medical education boards, overlapping with MARB’s functions. However, the rationale for withdrawing the entire regulation remains unclear.
- Continuing provision: The Postgraduate Medical Education Regulations, 2023 remain in force and contain provisions for penalising individual faculty members at postgraduate medical colleges.
Significance of MSMER, 2023
- Combating malpractice: MSMER sought to address corruption and irregularities in medical colleges, particularly ghost faculty (faculty members falsely shown as employed) and ghost patients (fictitious patients recorded to inflate clinical workload).
- Maintaining standards: Penalties for false reporting were intended to strengthen accountability for faculty availability, infrastructure and educational quality.
- Regulatory concern: Despite the expansion of medical seats, non-compliance remains a concern, while transparency in medical education has not improved adequately.
Concerns Regarding Accountability and Transparency
- Institutional versus individual liability: Penalising only institutions may be less effective than holding responsible individuals accountable, as institutional penalties can encourage administrators to accommodate irregularities rather than punish those responsible.
- Appeal-related ambiguity: MSMER specified timelines for appealing penalties. Although MARB regulations retain appeal mechanisms, their 15-day deadline may conflict with the 60-day period under the NMC Act, potentially triggering legal disputes and delaying enforcement.
- Questions over assessments: In proceedings under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, the Central Information Commission (CIC) revealed that the NMC had stated in 2024 that MARB had neither formally assessed nor rated medical colleges and that its standard forms need not be made public.
- Revised NMC response: In October 2025, the NMC stated that the responding officer’s records did not contain the corresponding assessment reports.
- Disclosure obligation: The MARB Regulations, 2023 require publication of the latest annual assessment results, raising concerns about whether assessments are being conducted and whether their outcomes are publicly accessible.
Institutional Framework: Important for UPSC
- National Medical Commission (NMC): A statutory regulator established under the National Medical Commission Act, 2019, responsible for maintaining standards of medical education and professional practice in India.
- Medical Assessment and Rating Board (MARB): An NMC board responsible for assessing and rating medical institutions and regulating matters relating to the establishment of medical colleges and increases in seats.
- Central Information Commission (CIC): A statutory body under the Right to Information Act, 2005, responsible for hearing appeals and complaints concerning access to information held by public authorities.
Way Forward
- Clarify accountability: The NMC should explain why MSMER was withdrawn and how individual responsibility for false reporting and malpractice will be enforced under the remaining regulations.
- Ensure transparency: MARB should publish assessment and rating results as required by its regulations, enabling public scrutiny of medical colleges.
- Resolve legal ambiguity: Appeal timelines should be harmonised to prevent procedural disputes from delaying regulatory action.
- Strengthen enforcement: The NMC must ensure that increasing medical seats does not compromise faculty availability, infrastructure, clinical training or educational quality.
Conclusion: The withdrawal of MSMER risks being perceived as regulatory relaxation rather than simplification unless the NMC demonstrates that equivalent penalties, transparent assessments and effective accountability mechanisms remain operational.
