SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(SC) 331

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R.K. AGRAWAL, MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR, JJ.
Kerala Ayurveda Paramparya Vaidya Forum – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala and Others – Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos. 897, 898, 899-900, 901, 902, 903, 904 & 905 of 2009
Decided On : 13-04-2018

IMPORTANT POINT
Quacks cannot be allowed to play with life of people.

Headnote:Indian Medical Central Council Act, 1970 – Section 17 r/w section 23 and 38, Travancore-Cochin Medical Practitioners Act, 1953 – Section 17(3)© protecting persons practicing Indian system of Medicine for at least five years as on the date of commencement of the Act – Section 23 of the Act 1953 providing for registration of persons practicing for five years – Section 38 prohibiting unregistered persons from practicing subject to exceptions mentioned therein – Appellants not fulfilling eligibility criteria – High Court rightly dismissing their claim. (Para 18, 20, 21)

       (1998) 7 SCC 579; 1992 Supp (3) SCC 147; (1997) 11 SCC 687 – Relied upon

       AIR 1987 P&H 81; AIR 1993 All. 283 – Cited with approval

       Facts of the case:

       Pursuant to the enactment of the Travancore-Cochin Medical Practitioners Act, 1953, the ‘Paramparya Vaidyas’ were debarred from practicing modern/homoeopathic/ayurvedic/ siddha/unani-tibbi medicines unless registered under the Act. Subsequently, three Central Acts, viz., The Indian Medical Council Act, 1956, The Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970 and the Homoeopathy Central Council Act, 1973 with regard to modern medicine, indigenous medicine and homoeopathic medicine respectively came into force.

       Akhila Kerala Parambarya Vaidya Federation as well as the persons practicing as ‘Paramparya Vaidyas’ filed a number of petitions before the High Court. The High Court, taking note of an affidavit filed by the State Government disposed of the original petitions while directing the State Government to have a serious consideration of the circumstances expeditiously.

       Several petitions were filed before the High Court by the ‘Paramparya Vaidyas’ claiming that the methods had been in vogue for a considerable long period of time. The Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the petitions filed by the appellants herein.

       Finding of the Court:

       High Court rightly dismissed the claim of the petitioners.

       Result: Appeal dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

R.K. Agrawal, J.

1. The above appeals have been filed against the judgment and order dated 08.01.2003 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in O.P. No. 24109 of 2001 and connected matters whereby the High Court had dismissed the petitions filed by the appellants herein.

2. Brief facts:

(a) In the State of Kerala, a number of persons are practicing in Sidha/Unani/Ayurveda system of medicine called as “Paramparya Vaidyas’ and passing their knowledge and experience to their descendants by way of training and practice. Normally, almost all the descendants in the family get training in the same field and adopt this as a profession and means of livelihood.

(b) Kerala Ayurveda Paramparya Vaidya Forum (in short ‘the Forum’) – the appellant herein is an association of ‘Paramparya Vaidyas’ in Travancore-Cochin, registered under the Travancore-Cochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies Registration Act, 1955. The main objective of the Forum is the welfare of its members and to render assistance for practice in indigenous medicines.

(c) Pursuant to the enactment of the Travancore-Cochin Medical Practitioners Act, 1953 (in short ‘the Act’), the ‘Paramparya Vaidyas’ were debarred from practicing modern/homoeopathic/ayurvedic/siddha/unani-tibbi medicines unless registered under the Act. Subsequently, three Central Acts, viz., The Indian Medical Council Act, 1956, The Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970 and the Homoeopathy Central Council Act, 1973 with regard to modern medicine, indigenous medicine and homoeopathic medicine respectively came into force.

(d) Being aggrieved by the enactment of the Act, Akhila Kerala Parambarya Vaidya Federation as well as the persons practicing as ‘Paramparya Vaidyas’ filed a number of petitions before the High Court. Learned single Judge of the High Court, taking note of an affidavit filed by the State Government stating that the question of granting registration to practice medicines to the ‘Paramparya Vaidyas’ can be considered at the time of enactment of Kerala Medical Practitioners Bill, by order dated 17.06.1997 in O.P. No. 118 of 1991 and other set of petitions, disposed of the original petitions while directing the State Government to have a serious consideration of the circumstances expeditiously.

(e) Several petitions were filed before the High Court by the ‘Paramparya Vaidyas’ claiming that the methods had been in vogue for a considerable long period of time. The Division Bench of the High Court, vide order dated 08.01.2003 dismissed the petitions filed by the appellants herein.

(f) Aggrieved by the order dated 08.01.2003, the appellants have preferred these appeals by way of special leave.

3. Heard the arguments advanced by learned senior counsel for the parties and perused the records. Since a common question of law and facts arise in these appeals, they are being disposed of by this common judgment.

Point(s) for consideration:-

4. The sole point for consideration before this Court is as to whether the persons who do not fulfill the prescribed qualification and are not duly registered under the relevant Statute, be permitted to practice as ‘Paramparya Vaidyas’?

Rival Submissions:

5. Learned senior counsel for the appellants contended before this Court that in the State of Kerala, a large number of persons are practicing in Sidha/Unani/Ayurveda system of medicines known as ‘Paramparya Vaidyas’, which are in vogue for a long time. They have acquired knowledge and experience from their gurus and parents and by continued practice over a long period of time they have acquired the requisite expertise. After the enactment of the Act, Section 38 empowered the State Government to regulate the qualifications and to provide for the registration of practitioners of modern medicine. It took within its ambit the homeopathic and indigenous systems of medicine as well. Learned senior counsel further contended that due to the promulgation of the Act, the appellants, wh










































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top