Can an additional bridge course after a homeopathy degree become the basis for registration with a medical council, or should such qualifications be determined solely by national regulators? That question has moved from academic debate to public controversy after Maharashtra reopened registration for BHMS graduates who complete the Certificate Course in Modern Pharmacology (CCMP), triggering an indefinite resident doctors’ strike and a nationwide protest warning from the Indian Medical Association (IMA).
While the immediate confrontation is unfolding in Maharashtra’s hospitals, the implications extend far beyond one state. At stake is not merely the registration of a category of practitioners, but a broader question that sits at the intersection of medical education, professional regulation and federal governance: who decides what constitutes a recognised qualification to practise modern medicine in India?
What changed on August 3
On August 3, Maharashtra’s Medical Education and Drugs Department (MEDD) issued a Government Resolution constituting a six-member committee to define competencies, an ethical framework and a standard operating procedure (SOP) for handling negligence involving BHMS graduates who have completed the Certificate Course in Modern Pharmacology (CCMP) and are registered with the Maharashtra Medical Council (MMC). The resolution also reopened the registration process from August 5.
The state government has maintained that this is not a fresh policy decision. Instead, it says the move is being implemented in compliance with a Bombay High Court order permitting provisional registration of eligible candidates pending the final disposal of writ petitions challenging the 2014 amendments. According to MEDD Secretary Dheeraj Kumar, registrations are being carried out in a separate register solely to comply with judicial directions and the Advocate General’s opinion.
Why this is an education policy issue
Beyond the protests, the controversy has reopened a long-standing debate over curriculum equivalence and professional qualifications.
Medical education in India is governed through statutory regulators such as the National Medical Commission (NMC) and the National Commission for Homoeopathy (NCH), which prescribe educational standards, curricula and professional competencies for their respective systems of medicine.
The present dispute therefore raises a larger question: Can a state government create an additional pathway into modern medical practice through state legislation when the national regulator has not approved the underlying qualification?
The answer could shape future debates around professional education, bridge courses and cross-system medical practice across the country.
What exactly is CCMP?
The Certificate Course in Modern Pharmacology (CCMP) was introduced through Maharashtra’s 2014 amendments to the Maharashtra Homeopathic Practitioners Act and the Maharashtra Medical Council Act.
The programme allows BHMS graduates to undergo additional training conducted through the Maharashtra University of Health Sciences (MUHS) across 33 institutions. On successful completion, they become eligible for a separate register maintained by the Maharashtra Medical Council, permitting them to prescribe a limited list of modern medicines.
State officials have described CCMP as a one-year programme. Some doctors opposing the latest decision have referred to it as a six-month course on social media, though that duration has not been independently verified against MUHS curriculum documents. More than 8,000 practitioners have completed the programme. As of March 2026, 2,182 had registered on the MMC portal, although registrations remained stalled because the issue was pending before the Bombay High Court. The August 3 Government Resolution effectively restarted that process.
Why the decision has alarmed the medical education community
The Maharashtra Association of Resident Doctors (MARD) launched an indefinite strike from August 5, suspending routine clinical and academic work in government medical colleges. The agitation intensified from August 6, with Central MARD withdrawing all routine and non-emergency services until further notice. The issue has also drawn support from IMA Maharashtra, the Maharashtra State Resident Doctors Association and the Association of State Medical Interns.
The debate has now reached the national level after the IMA headquarters wrote to Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis seeking withdrawal of the Government Resolution. In a letter signed by National President Dr Anilkumar J. Nayak and Honorary Secretary General Dr Sarbari Dutta, the association argued that CCMP has not been approved by either the National Medical Commission or the National Commission for Homoeopathy, described dual medical council registration as “unprecedented”, and cited the Supreme Court’s Poonam Verma vs Ashwin Patel judgment. It has warned of a nationwide strike if the Government Resolution is not withdrawn.
Prominent doctors have also questioned the educational equivalence of the programme. Dr Dhruv Chauhan argued that years of MBBS training, clinical postings and compulsory internship cannot be equated with a certificate course, while Dr Harshad Sharma described the issue as one of maintaining educational standards and patient safety, calling for an independent review.
What supporters of CCMP argue
Supporters of the programme maintain that the debate is not about replacing MBBS doctors but about recognising additional training undertaken by BHMS graduates. They argue that homeopathy students already study subjects such as anatomy, physiology and pharmacology during their undergraduate education and that CCMP provides structured training to prescribe a limited list of modern medicines within a defined scope of practice.
They also point out that the programme has existed in Maharashtra since 2014 and was created through legislative amendments rather than an executive order. The Maharashtra government, however, has largely avoided defending the programme on educational grounds in this latest round, instead maintaining that the registrations are being resumed primarily to comply with judicial directions.
Timeline
2014: Maharashtra amends the Maharashtra Homeopathic Practitioners Act and Maharashtra Medical Council Act to introduce CCMP.
2014 onwards: The amendments are challenged before the Bombay High Court.
September 17, 2025: The Bombay High Court permits provisional registration of eligible CCMP candidates pending final adjudication.
August 3, 2026: Maharashtra issues a fresh Government Resolution constituting a committee on competencies, ethics and negligence while reopening registrations.
August 5: MMC resumes registrations; resident doctors begin an indefinite strike.
August 6: The IMA protests at Mumbai’s Azad Maidan and warns of a nationwide agitation.
What’s actually being contested
The controversy is not simply about whether BHMS graduates can prescribe modern medicines. Under Maharashtra’s 2014 legal framework, they already could in limited circumstances after completing CCMP.
The present dispute is over whether registration with the Maharashtra Medical Council confers state-recognised legitimacy on cross-system practice without approval from the National Medical Commission, the statutory regulator responsible for modern medical education and professional standards.
That question, where the authority of state governments ends and that of national regulators begins is ultimately one that the Bombay High Court will have to settle.
What happens next
The CCMP controversy has evolved into much more than a dispute over one bridge course. It has become a wider debate over how India defines medical qualifications, who has the authority to recognise professional competencies, and how educational standards should be maintained across different systems of medicine.
The Bombay High Court’s eventual decision will therefore have implications that extend beyond Maharashtra. It could shape future policy on bridge courses, professional regulation and the relationship between state governments and national medical education regulators, issues that sit at the heart of India’s evolving higher education and healthcare ecosystem.
