VARGHESE MAYMADUM Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The common question which arises in both these petitions is as regards the validity of G.O. (Ms.) No. 129/83/HD, dated 31st May, 1983 (Ext. P-3 in O. P. No. 4524 of 1983 and Ext. P-1 in O. P. No. 5887 of 1983) whereby the Government appointed the 2nd respondent as Registrar of the Travancore - Cochin Medical Council, Kerala Nurses and Midwives Council and the Kerala Dental Council. The main contentions of the petitioners are: (1) the 2nd respondent was appointed by the Government as Registrar of the State Dental Council without authority; (2) the 2nd respondent's appointment as Registrar of the Travancore - Cochin Medical Council and the Kerala Nurses' and Midwives' Council was without proper consultation and (3) the 2nd respondent was not qualified to be appointed to the post.

(2.) I shall first deal with the appointment of the 2nd respondent as Registrar of the State Dental Council. Ext. P-1 shows that the appointment was made by the Government. The petitioners rightly contend that the Government is not the appointing authority. S.28 of the Dentists Act, 1948 (Act No. XVI of 1948) reads:

(3.) Ext. R-1(a) is an executive order which prescribes the scale of pay as well as the qualifications of the Registrar. This order cannot take the place of Regulations made by Council under S.28. I am told that the Government has not made rules in terms of S.55(2)(f). However, it is unnecessary to finally pronounce upon the validity of Ext. R-1(a), for its validity has not been challenged in either of the two petitions.