VANITHA R Vs. MINISTRY OF AYUSH & ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Dr. Vanitha R (hereinafter referred to as "appellant") is aggrieved by the Ld. Single Judge's decision, rejecting her writ petition. She approached this court, challenging a letter dated 08.03.2018 issued by the Union Ministry of Ayush (hereinafter referred to "the Union") stating that her tenure as President of the Central Council of Indian Medicine (hereinafter referred to as "CCIM") had expired on 04.07.2017 and, requiring her to forthwith vacate that said office. The appellant also challenged the other letters, which initiated consequential action scheduling fresh elections to the post of the President have been scheduled for 23.03.2018.

(2.) In the present case, the relevant facts are that, Dr. Ved Prakash Tyagi was earlier elected as the President of CCIM and remained so till 27.08.2016. Since he was defeated in the CCIM elections in 2016 and he ceased to be a member of that body, the Supreme Court, vide its order dated 208.2016, directed him to discontinue as the CCIM President. Thereafter, as per the terms of Regulation 5(2) of the Central Council of Indian Medicine (General) Regulations, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as "the Regulations"), Dr. V. Arunachalam, the Vice President of CCIM was handed over charge of the post of President. Pursuant to the resolution of the CCIM executive dated 27.02017 with regard to holding of fresh elections for the post of President on 14.03.2017, notice under Section 7 (1) of the Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), calling for elections to the post of CCIM President was issued. In ensuing elections held on 14.03.2017, the appellant was elected as the President.

(3.) The appellant claims to have taken steps to improve the CCIM's working. Furthermore, Mr. V.D Raghnandan Sharma objected to her election under Sections 7 (1) and (3) of the Act. In response to this, while rejecting the representation, the Union, vide its letter dated 24.08.2017, specifically stated that the elections to the posts of President and Vice-President were conducted under Section 7 (1) the Act, whereas Section 7 (3) which dealt with issue of filling of casual vacancies, applied to other CCIM members. However, subsequently, the Union took the position that the appellant's term was valid only till 04.07.2017, i.e., for the remaining period of the previous President's term. The impugned letter directed the appellant to vacate the post of President with immediate effect and further directed the CCIM Secretary to conduct fresh elections for that post. The appellant requested the respondents, including the Union, to withdraw the letter, but instead of doing so, it directed completion of elections by 25.02018. Thereafter, on 09.02018, office memoranda were issued by the Union to the various authorities, asking them to ensure that the appellant had vacated her office by 5:00 p.m. that day. The appellant also placed reliance on a letter by the Secretary of CCIM dated 10.02018 to say that he was forced to sign and issue a notice for election after 8:00 pm on 09.02018, by the Union.