ANUBAVA ALLOPATHY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr.N.Kalyanasundaram, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr.M.Devendran, the learned Senior Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for the first respondent and Ms.D.Geetha, the learned Additional Government Pleader, appearing for the second and third respondents.

(2.) IT has been stated that the petitioner Sangam is a registered Association with Registration No.90/92. IT consists of members who had started their career as compounders and nurses and who had worked either under the Government or with private Doctors. They had acquired practical knowledge of diagnosing diseases and in the administration of allopathic medicines. They have undergone a two year full time diploma course in Thilaga Medical Institute, Madurai. Thereafter, they have also undergone practical training for two months, and they had been practising in rural areas, treating patients by administering allopathic medicines. The State of Maharashtra had enacted the Maharashtra Medical Practitioners Act, 1961, which allows such persons to practice in allopathic medicines. Referring to the said Act enacted in the State of Maharashtra, the Health Ministry of Government of India in Letter No.V/11016/8/74 MPT, dated 25.4.75, had directed the State Governments to enlist unqualified medical practitioners and to initiate legislation in line with the Maharashtra Act. The States of Punjab, Kerala and Uttar Pradesh have enacted legislations in line with the Maharashtra Act. Pursuant to the direction issued by the Central Government, Thilaga Medical Institute, Madurai, had been registered and it had started functioning in the year 1962, conducting regular Courses. Since the Government of Tamilnadu had not enacted any legislation in this regard, the present writ petition has been filed to direct the respondents to take appropriate steps to regularise the practice of the members of the petitioner Association, as unqualified medical practitioners practising in modern medicine.

(3.) THE learned counsel appearing on behalf of the second and third respondents had also placed before this Court a decision of the Supreme Court, made in Civil Appeal No.336 of 2007, (Private Medical Practitioners Association Vs. THE State of Tamilnadu and Others), wherein, it has been held that there should be a legal right vested in the petitioner for the Courts of law to issue a writ of Mandamus. In the absence of any legal right, such a writ cannot be sought for, or granted by the Courts. Since the members of the appellant Association were not qualified and registered with the State Medical Council, they cannot be permitted to practice, either in Modern Medicine or in any other System of Medicine. As per the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956, no person can practice medicine without the requisite qualifications and registration with the concerned State Medical Council. If unqualified private practitioners are allowed to treat the patients, even for minor ailments, it may endanger the lives of the people. Since the Circular issued by the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare (Department of Health), Government India, New Delhi, does not have any statutory or binding force on the State Government, the State Government is not liable to implement the same by permitting the unqualified members of the petitioner Association to practice in Modern Medicine, subject to the limitations contained in the Letter Ref.No.V.11016/3/82/ME(P), dated 15.7.86. Since successive writ petitions had been filed by the appellant, the Supreme Court had dismissed the Civil Appeal with costs, which was quantified at Rs.50,000/-.