2007 (11) TMI 614 - SC - Indian Laws

Whether the Faculty under the 1951 Act has unqualified right to grant affiliation to such institutions or colleges which are not following the BAMS course prescribed by CCIM through regulations under the 1970 Act? Whether the provisions of the 1982 Act which seek to regulate institutions imparting training in Ayurvedic and Unani Systems of Medicine shall cover and regulate even those institutions which have been granted affiliation by the Faculty?

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Validity and recognition of the GAMS degree.
2. Authority of the Faculty under the 1951 Act to grant affiliation and confer degrees.
3. Impact of the 1982 Act on institutions not recognized under it.
4. Effect of the Indian Medicine Central Council (Amendment) Act, 2003 on previously conferred degrees.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Validity and Recognition of the GAMS Degree:
The petitioners, who obtained the GAMS degree from the State Faculty of Ayurvedic and Unani Medicines under the 1951 Act, were denied the opportunity to appear for the post-graduate entrance examination. The respondents argued that the GAMS degree was not recognized by the Central Council of Indian Medicine (CCIM) as per the 1970 Act, which prescribed the BAMS course. The High Court ruled that the GAMS degree was outdated and not valid, as the BAMS course had replaced it.

2. Authority of the Faculty under the 1951 Act:
The Faculty established under the 1951 Act has the authority to recognize educational institutions, conduct examinations, and confer degrees. The 1951 Act, which received the President's assent and was published in the Bihar Gazette, provides for the development and regulation of Ayurvedic and Unani systems of medicine. The Faculty's power to grant degrees and affiliations is recognized under the 1970 Act, as per the Second Schedule, which includes the GAMS degree from 1953 onwards.

3. Impact of the 1982 Act on Institutions Not Recognized Under It:
The 1982 Act, which replaced the 1981 Ordinance, requires institutions intending to start medical courses to seek permission from the State Government. The Act aims to regulate and control the opening of indigenous medical institutions to ensure adequate teaching facilities and prevent commercialization. Institutions operating without such permission face penalties and closure. However, the Act does not explicitly invalidate degrees already conferred by the Faculty under the 1951 Act.

4. Effect of the Indian Medicine Central Council (Amendment) Act, 2003:
The 2003 Amendment introduced Sections 13A, 13B, and 13C, requiring medical colleges to seek Central Government permission to establish new courses or increase admission capacity. Section 13C allows existing colleges three years to obtain such permission. Failure to do so renders the qualifications granted by these colleges unrecognized. However, the Court held that this amendment does not retrospectively invalidate degrees conferred before its enactment.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court concluded that the GAMS degree conferred by the Faculty under the 1951 Act remains valid and recognized for purposes of further education and employment. The 1982 Act and the 2003 Amendment do not retrospectively affect the validity of degrees already granted. The appeals were allowed, and the High Court's judgment was set aside, affirming the recognition of the GAMS degree for higher education and employment purposes.