The main legal point established in the judgment is the conflict between State and Central legislation in regulating the Siddha system of medicine, and the court's determination of certain provisions of the State Act as unconstitutional and ultra vires the Central Act.

The first two writ petitions were admitted on 11. 1999 and the third writ petition was admitted on 33. 1999. The Miscellaneous application filed by the petitioners for grant of interim stay on the impugned legislation and the stay of the impugned G.O.70

Department of Health and Family Welfare dated 12. 1978 was dismissed by a reasoned order dated 20.9.2000. In respect of the earlier two miscellaneous petitions, the prayer for interim relief was dismissed on 212. 2002. In the subsequent application for interim stay filed by them, only notice was ordered. Pursuant to the notice, the second and fifth respondents have filed counter affidavits. In view of the interconnectivity among the three writ petitions, they were heard together and common order is being passed.

2. The Tamil Nadu Legislature passed an Act viz. The Tamil Nadu Siddha System of Medicine (Development and Registration of Practitioners) Act, 1997 (For short "TN Siddha Act"). The said Act provides for establishment of Tamil Nadu Siddha Medical Council (For short "State Council"). Under Section 2(14), the Act provides for prescription of a Schedule. Section 34 of the TN Siddha Act reads as follows:-

The Government may, if they are satisfied on the report of the Council or otherwise that the course of study and examination prescribed by any University or an institution or authority referred to in sub-section (1) of section 27 conferring, granting or issuing any degree, diploma, licence, certificate or any other like award---

.(i) included in the Schedule are not such as to secure the possession by persons obtaining such degree, diploma, licence, certificate or any other like award of the requisite knowledge and skill for the efficient practise of Siddha medicine, or

.(2) not included in the Schedule are such as to secure the possession by the persons aforesaid of such knowledge and skill by notification direct that such degree, diploma, licence, certificate or any other like award ---

.(a) in a case falling under clause (1), be removed from the Schedule, or

.(b) in a case falling under clause (2), be included in the Schedule, and upon the issue of such notification, the Schedule shall be deemed to have been amended accordingly."

3. The schedule prescribed under Section 34 read with Section 214 the names of the University, respective Boards of Examinations as well as the recognized medical qualifications. The present case is concerned with only Part II, Part III and Part IV, which may be reproduced as under:-

4. The two writ petitioner-Association as well as one Siddha Medical Practitioner are challenging the power of the State enacting legislation of this sort. According to them, there is already a central legislation i.e.) Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970 (Central Act 48 of 1970) is fully occupying the field. If the State has power to prescribe qualification for grant of educational degrees and diplomas to be recognized by the Universities and Medical Council, then it will whittle down the standard of education and also usurp the power of the Central Council from dealing with such issues.

.5. A reference is also made to the statement of objects and reasons found in TN Siddha Act. It reads as follows:-

.At present there is no law to provide for the development of the Siddha System of medicine and for the regulation of the practitioners of the Siddha Medicine in the State of Tamil Nadu. It has been considered necessary to develop the Siddha System of Medicine and to register the practitioners of Siddha Medicine in the State. It has also been considered necessary to establish a Council called the Tamil Nadu Siddha Medical Council for the purpose."

.6. It was stated by them that the objects and reasons found in the enactment is purely a misstatement. The Central Act as well as the Central Council which was enacted in the year 1970 and brought into force from 1976 is only intended to achieve the said object and therefore, there was neither any