Practising in another state

What the law requires

The NMC Act allows a person to practise if they are enrolled in a State Register or the National Register (section 34). The 2023 Registration Regulations add that an eligible person may choose any state or states in which to practise when applying for a licence, and the application is referred to the council of each (Regulation 6(b)).

Transfer under the 2023 Regulations

Regulation 9, Transfer of Licence to Practice, sets out the procedure:

1. A practitioner registered with one council who wants to practise in another state applies through the Ethics and Medical Registration Board’s web portal.
2. The council the practitioner is registered with is notified. It approves the transfer within 30 days if it has no objection.
3. If it takes no decision within 30 days, the transfer is deemed to have been approved.
4. The council of the new state then issues a licence to practise in that state.
5. The registration number stays the same; only the state or union territory code changes. The change is automatically reflected in the National Register.

Regulation 6(d) describes the state code as suffixed to the unique number, while Regulation 9(iv) speaks of a prefixed code being substituted. The text is recorded here as published.

As published, Regulation 4 also provides that until the Regulations and the relevant sections are in force, “licence to practice and prevailing system of Registration shall continue”.

Many doctors look for this process under the name “NOC” — a no-objection certificate from their council. The 2023 Regulations do not use that term. Any no-objection or re-registration procedure a council currently operates is recorded on that council’s page once verified.

What the 2026 draft would change

The draft amendments published on 11 August 2026 would, if made final, remove the transfer procedure altogether:

• Regulation 9 would be deleted.
• A practitioner granted registration by one council, and allotted a UID in the National Medical Register, would be eligible to practise in any state or union territory without fresh registration or licence there (proposed Regulation 6(f)).
• A new Regulation 9A would give the council of the state where the cause of action arose jurisdiction over allegations of professional misconduct, unethical conduct or medical negligence. That council would implement its decision and record it against the practitioner in the online register.
• Removal and restoration of a name would be entered by the council of primary registration. Action recommended by another council would be reflected in the National Register and automatically in the primary council’s register (proposed Regulation 10).