9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Validity of public notice recognizing certain degrees in Indian Medicine; Challenge to public notice by Delhi Pradesh Registered Medical Practitioners' Association and Dr. Swarup Singh; Interpretation of Section 17(3) of the Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970; Recognition of degrees awarded by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan Prayag; Right to practice as a registered medical practitioner in Ayurveda. Analysis: The Supreme Court addressed the validity of a public notice issued by the Director, Health Services, Delhi Administration regarding the recognition of Ayurvedic degrees awarded by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan Prayag. The notice stated that degrees awarded after 1967 were not recognized under the Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970, affecting the registration and practice rights of individuals holding such degrees. Writ petitions challenging the notice were dismissed by the Delhi High Court, citing non-recognition of degrees post-1967 under the Act. The appellants argued that practitioners with degrees from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan were registered in various states and entitled to practice Ayurveda. They relied on Section 17(3) of the Act, which they interpreted as protecting the rights of registered practitioners regardless of degree recognition. However, the Supreme Court disagreed with this interpretation. They clarified that Section 17(3) protected practitioners who were already registered or practicing in the discipline before the Act's enforcement, not those acquiring degrees post-1967. The Court highlighted the legislative intent behind Section 17(3) to safeguard existing practitioners' rights and privileges. Since the writ petitioners did not fall within the protected category, their right to practice based on unrecognized degrees was not upheld. The Court also noted that the challenge was not against the validity of the Act itself, further justifying the High Court's decision. The appellants raised concerns about the quality of education provided by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan and the societal need for Ayurvedic practitioners. However, the Court deemed these considerations as policy matters outside its purview, emphasizing that determining educational standards and expertise in Indian Medicine is the domain of relevant authorities. Ultimately, the Court upheld the Delhi High Court's decision, dismissing the appeals without costs. The judgment reaffirmed the legal position under the Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970, and the limitations on practicing based on unrecognized degrees, despite the societal context and service considerations raised by the appellants.
|
