Tablarin v.

Gutierrez,
152 SCRA 730

FACTS : Petitioners, TERESITA TABLARIN, MA. LUZ CIRIACO, MA NIMFA B. ROVIRA, EVANGELINA S. LABAO,
spoke in behalf of themselves, of other applicants for the admission into the Medical Colleges during the
school year 1987-1988 and as well as the future applicants who have not yet taken or who have not
successfully hurdeled the NMAT or the National Medical Admission Test filed with the RTC of the National
Capital Judicial Region a Petition for Declaratory Judgement and preliminary injunction sought to urge the
Secretary of Education, Culture and Sports, Board of Medical Education and the Center for Educational
Measurement from enforcing the requirement for taking the NMAT exam on 26 April 1987 and for future
NMAT exams on the condition for securing certificates of eligibility for admission to Medical school. After
hearing the petition, the trial court denied the petition and the NMAT was conducted and administered
as scheduled.

Petitioners then raised the question of whether or not a writ of primary injunction may be issued pending
a resolution of the issue of constitutionality of the assailed statute and administrative order of Section
5(a) and (f) of RA No. 2382 as amended by MECS Order No. 52 or the Medical Act to regualte the admission
to medical schools, petitioners invoked a number of provisions from the 1987 Constituion but the notable
provisions raised were “Artcle II, Section 17 : “The State shall give priority to education, science and
technology, arts, culture, and sports to foster patriotism and nationalism, accelerate social progress, and
promote total human liberation and development.”

But the Court noted that the statutes raised by the petitioners failed to demonstrate or specify which
factors or features of the NMAT render it “unfair” and “unreasonable” or “inequitable”, on the contrary
the statutes and the regulations the petitioners attacked are designed to promote “quality education” at
a level of professional schools, furthermore the court said the State is not enjoined to make quality
education accessible to all who would want to enroll in a professional school but to make such education
accessible to all who qualify under reasonable, fair and equitable admission and academic requirements.

ISSUE: Whether or not prescribing the passing of the NMAT as a condition for admission to medical
school have a reasonable relation with the securing of the health and safety of the general community.

HELD: Yes, regulation of the practice of medicine in all its branches has long been recognized as a
reasonable method of protecting the health and safety of the public. The power to regulate and control
the practice of medicine includes the power to regulate admission to the ranks of those who are
authorized to practice medicine. Legislation and administrative regulations requiring to first take and pass
medical board examinations is a valid exercise of governmental power.