NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 2583 of 2018 Dr. Rajesh Kumar S/o Late Shri Kewal Ram Gangwani, Aged About 53 Years, R/o Sindhi Colony, Jarhabhata, Bilaspur, Tahsil And District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh).

---- Petitioner Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary Public Health And Department, New Raipur, Raipur (Chhattisgarh), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Director, Ayurved Yog, Naturopathy And Homeopathy (Medicine) Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3. Commissioner Revenue, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh), District :

Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

4. Chief Medical And Health Officer, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh), District :

Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

5. Registrar, Chhattisgarh Ayurvedic, Unani Clinical And Naturopathy Board, Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

6. District Ayurved Hospital, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh), District :

Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents (Cause Title is taken from Case Information System)

For Petitioner : Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Advocate For State : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Deputy Advocate Government Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

Order on Board

13.02.2024

1) By way of this petition, the petitioner has sought the following relief(s):-

“10.1 That thus, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of MANDAMUS restraining/injucting the respondents to raised hindrence/prohibition in the medical practice of the petitioner registration by Madhya Pradesh Board of Ayurved, Unani System of Medicine and Naturopathy Bhopal.

10.2 That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be please to called the entire record of the proceeding if any initiated by the respondents.

10.3 that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue any writ or direction or order as deem fit in the interest of justice.

10.4. It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of MENDAMUS quashing the order dated 15.01.2018 issued by the respondent No.5 and may kindly please to direct the respondent No.5 to register the petitioner in the role of Medical Practitioner in the interest of justice.”

2) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner moved an application for registration with the respondent Board for practising medical profession in the State of Chhattisgarh, but vide order dated 15.01.2018 respondent No.5/Registrar, Chhattisgarh Ayurvedic Unani and Naturopathy Board, Raipur, has rejected the application of the petitioner. He would further submit that the decision taken by the respondent authorities is erroneous and the same is liable to be set aside.

3) On the other hand, learned State counsel would oppose the submissions and submit that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Rajasthan Pradesh Vaidya Samiti versus Union of India along with other connected matters reported in (2010) 12 SCC

609 while dealing with a similar issue held in para 37 and 53 as under:-

“37. Thus, from the above, it is evident that under the then prevailing rules, certificates issued by the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan Prayag remained recognised only upto 1967. The Authorities under the Statute, on the report submitted by the State of U.P. had taken a decision not to recognise the said courses any further. The Society for the reasons best known to it never made an attempt to get recognition after fulfilling the legal requirements and getting the Entry No.105 in Second Schedule of the Act, 1970, modified.

53. In view of the above, Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 21043 of 2008 is allowed and it is held that a person who acquired the certificate, degree or diploma from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan Prayag after 1967 is not eligible to indulge in any kind of a medical practice. All other Civil Appeals are dismissed. No costs. ”

Thus, he would pray that in light of the aforesaid judgment, this petition may be disposed of.

4) Taking into consideration the fact that the Hon’ble Supreme Court