2012 (2) TMI 703 - SC - Indian Laws

Constitutionality of Section 7 of the Indian Medicine Central Council Act 1970 - Obligation of the Central Government to hold elections to the Central Council - Timeliness and procedural requirements for elections to the Central Council - HELD THAT - Neither the Government nor the Central Council can abjure their obligation to complete the election process within five years or in any case within a reasonable time thereafter. Thus in our considered opinion a period of three months would be more than sufficient for completing the election process in accordance with law. This time limit shall operate only and as and when the Central Government and the Central Council jointly and severely are not able to hold the fresh elections within the term of office of the previously elected members i.e. five years from the date on which the members first assumed office. The words of Section 7 of the Act are intended to operate in an extra-ordinary situation as the normal course should be that the Central Government hold the elections within a period of five years from the date of notification of the elected candidates for the previous tenure. Even where recourse to this exceptional situation becomes necessary even there the concept of reasonable time would come into play in a situation where no definite period has been prescribed by the Legislature itself. The courts can always supply such lacuna in the interpretation of provisions of a law so as to achieve the object of the Act particularly when such interpretation would be in consonance with the legislative object of the statute. Thus in our considered opinion a period of three months would be more than sufficient time for completing the election process in the event of exceptional circumstances and if the elections had not been commenced and completed within the period of previous tenure of five years as is the requirement of law and the Government cannot abjure its obligation to do so within a maximum period of three months. Thus we partially allow this Public Interest Litigation with the above observations and the following directions (A) Section 7 of the Indian Medicine Central Council Act 1970 or any part thereof is neither ultra vires nor violative of Articles 14 and/or 16 of the Constitution of India. (B) We hereby mandate that the Central Government shall discharge all its duties and functions as contemplated under Sections 3 4 and 7 of the Indian Medicine Central Council Act 1970 without default delay and within the required intervals. We make it clear that it is the obligation of the Central Government to hold election to the Central Council within the period of five years i.e. before expiry of the term of office of the President/Vice-President and Member of the Central Council as provided under Section 7 of the Act. (C) In the eventuality of exceptional circumstances if the Central Government is not able to hold elections within the period of the prescribed term it shall complete the process within a reasonable time thereafter and in no case exceeding three months from the date on which the term of the members in office expires. (D) No elected Member under any of the three systems of medicine Ayurveda Unani or Siddha shall hold the office of the President Vice President or Member beyond a period of three months from the expiry of their term. (E) We direct the Secretary Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and the President of the Central Council to circulate copies of this judgment for strict compliance by all concerned. Conclusion The Court partially allowed the Public Interest Litigation with specific directions to ensure timely elections and proper constitution of the Central Council. It dismissed other related petitions and applications providing liberty to the petitioners to seek appropriate relief in competent courts if necessary. The Court appreciated the assistance rendered by the learned ASG and all counsel involved in the case.

Summary

Issues Involved:

1. Constitutionality of Section 7 of the Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970.
2. Obligation of the Central Government to hold elections to the Central Council of Indian Medicine.
3. Timeliness and procedural compliance for holding elections and filling vacancies in the Central Council.

Summary:

1. Constitutionality of Section 7 of the Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970:
The petitioner challenged the constitutionality of Section 7 of the Act, which allows members to continue in office until their successors are elected or nominated, arguing it violates Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. The Court held that the provision ensures there is no vacuum in the Central Council's membership and is not unconstitutional. The Court emphasized the presumption of constitutionality and the necessity to interpret statutes to make them effective. The legislative intent was to avoid any gap in the functioning of the Council, and the provision was deemed a safeguard for the interregnum period.

2. Obligation of the Central Government to hold elections:
The petitioner sought a direction for the Central Government to hold elections and fill vacancies promptly. The Court noted that during the pendency of the petition, elections were completed in most states except for some due to the absence of Siddha practitioners. The Court reiterated the statutory obligation of the Central Government to conduct elections within the prescribed term of five years and to fill vacancies within a reasonable time, not exceeding three months from the expiry of the term.

3. Timeliness and procedural compliance for holding elections:
The Court highlighted the importance of timely elections to avoid indefinite tenure extensions. It directed the Central Government to discharge its duties under Sections 3, 4, and 7 of the Act without delay. The Court mandated that no elected member shall hold office beyond three months after their term expires, emphasizing the need for strict compliance to avoid prejudicing the functioning of the Central Council and the public reliance on these medical systems.

Conclusion:
The Court partially allowed the petition, upholding the constitutionality of Section 7 and directing the Central Government to ensure timely elections and compliance with statutory provisions. The petitioner's other prayers were rendered infructuous due to subsequent developments, and related applications were dismissed with liberty to seek appropriate relief in competent courts.