RAMJEE SINGH Vs. UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the respondent presses for the disposal of the petition since interim orders are in force.

(3.) The petitioner had previously filed Civil Writ Petition No. 1186/2006 challenging the appointment of an Administrator to the Central Council of Homeopathy (CCH) which was disposed of by the following order dated 7.2.2006: There is no need to reflect upon the finding or efficacy of the Report of the Inquiry Commission, which admittedly has not been signed by all the Members. After hearing arguments in some detail, learned Counsel for the respondent on instructions from Dr. Alok Kumar, Deputy Advisor, Department of Ayurveda, Yoga and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha and Homoepathy (Ayush), states that elections shall be conducted in accordance with Section 7(1) of the Homeopathy Central Council Act, 1973 within a period of four weeks from today. He further states that the impugned Order dated 18.1.2006 shall not be acted upon in these circumstances. Prima facie there appears to be no provision in the statute for the appointment of an Administrator. This is manifestly clear from the Report of the Rajya Sabha pertaining to the proposed Homeopathy Central Council (Amendment) Bill, 2005. The respondents had set up a case for the amendment to the statute empowering the appointment of an Administrator. The Committee expressed the opinion that such a provision would not be democratic and in the interest of the Council. Inasmuch as the Administrator has been appointed, the impugned order does not have the sanction of law. It is accordingly quashed. The Writ Petition stands disposed of in these terms.