Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
V.G.ARUN
Indian Medical Association Kerala State Branch – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India Represented By Its Secretary – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. legal arguments against the ncahp act. (Para 2) |
| 2. contentions regarding nmc act provisions. (Para 3) |
| 3. jurisdiction to interpret medical practice. (Para 4) |
| 4. arguments for the independence of physiotherapy. (Para 5) |
| 5. regulatory framework for healthcare professionals. (Para 6) |
| 6. discussion on the use of 'dr' title. (Para 7) |
| 7. court's decision and reasoning on claims. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 8. writ petitions dismissed by the court. (Para 10) |
JUDGMENT :
V.G.ARUN, J.
1. The petitioners are qualified medical professionals in the field of modern scientific medicine and are aggrieved by the powers and status given to Physiotherapists and Occupational Therapists under the National Commission for Allied and Healthcare Profession Act, 2021 ('the NCAHP Act' for short) as well as the Competency Based Curriculum for Physiotherapy and Occupational Therapy. According to the petitioners, the objectionable provisions in the NCAHP Act and the Curriculum run counter to the provisions of the National Medical Commission Act , 2019 ('the NMC Act' for short). They contend that, while the specialist medical professionals in the specialty of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation are qualified doctors,
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
