![\"2](\"https:\/\/static.toiimg.com\/thumb\/msid-132024612,imgsize-87338,width-400,height-225,resizemode-4\/2-states-2-different-rules-for-registration-of-doctors.jpg\" "\\"2")
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\nNEW DELHI: Two states have come up with two different models when it comes to allowing doctors to practise in their jurisdiction. While Andhra Pradesh has facilitated interstate practice, Maharashtra has retained verification safeguards, reviving debate over a national registration framework for medical practitioners. On June 11, Andhra Pradesh govt allowed doctors registered with any State or Union Territory Medical Council to practise in the state without obtaining a separate registration or No Objection Certificate (NOC). The move, part of state\u2019s deregulation reforms, removed a long-standing requirement that often delayed doctors moving across states. Days earlier, on June 5, Maharashtra Medical Council adopted a different approach. It removed the need for doctors to obtain an NOC themselves but retained registration and verification requirements. The council now directly seeks verification from the parent state council and grants provisional registration pending clearance. AP Medical Council member Dr Daggumati Sreehari Rao said the order does not eliminate oversight. Doctors from other states will still have to apply online, disclose their registration details and declare any disciplinary proceedings against them. The council will verify these details with the parent state council before permitting medical practice. Rao said detailed procedures for the system are still being finalised. The debate has gained momentum since National Medical Commission examined a proposal to allow Armed Forces Medical Services doctors, who are frequently transferred, to practise nationwide on the basis of a single registration. Supporters of the stance say multiple state registrations create unnecessary barriers for doctors. RTI activist Dr Babu V said Andhra Pradesh\u2019s decision could provide a template for wider reform. \u201cDisallowing doctors from serving where they are needed because of bureaucratic registration requirements is not in the best interests of patients or the nation. If NMC can consider nationwide practice rights for armed forces doctors, the same principle can be extended to all registered doctors,\u201d he said. IMA president Dr Anil Kumar J Nayak, however, cautioned against removing verification safeguards. \u201cRegistration can be simplified, but accountability cannot be compromised. Verification is important to identify doctors facing disciplinary action elsewhere,\u201d he said.<\/div>\n