2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 18436
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN
Dr.Monika Eswaran – Appellant
Versus
The Superintendent of Police – Respondent
Practitioners registered under traditional medicine systems can prescribe modern medicines as per government regulations, conditional on adherence to legal provisions.
Headnote:
Medical Practice - Writ Petition - Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970, Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 - Summary
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a registered Ayurveda practitioner, claimed harassment by respondents for prescribing allopathic medicines despite a government order supporting her practice under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act.
Issues: Whether the petitioner is permitted to practice allopathic medicine alongside Ayurveda without interference from regulatory authorities.
Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted the Government Order and relevant provisions of law as granting the petitioner the right to practice both Ayurvedic and allopathic medicine while adhering to legal stipulations.
Final Decision: The respondents were ordered not to interfere with the petitioner's practice of allopathic medicine.
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed forbearing the respondents from in any manner harassing the petitioner and interfering with her medical practice as a registered medical practitioner to keep allopathic medicines and prescribe the same to her patients.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.
3. The petitioner is a registered medical practitioner in Ayurveda and registered herself in the Tamil Nadu Board of Indian Medicine. Accordingly, she was qualified to practice the Ayurvedic System of Medicine and Surgery valid for life time. In fact, the petitioner's father was also a registered medical practitioner in Ayurveda. She has been practicing in Ayurvedic and Allopathic System of medicines along with her father, who has been practicing for the past twenty five years. In fact, the Government of Tamil Nadu has also issued order in G.O.Ms.No.248, Health and Family Welfare (IM 2-2)
Department, dated 08.09.2010 declaring that the registered medical practitioners in Ayurveda, Siddha and Unani Tibb as persons practicing modern scientific system of medicine under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act 1940 and the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules 1945. Even then, the respondents are harassing the petitioner not to prescribe allopathic medicines to the patients. Hence, this writ petition.
4. It is relevant to extract the G.O.Ms.No.248, Health and Family Welfare (IM 2-2) dated 08.09.2010, which is hereunder :-
“No.II(2)/HF/575/2010 – Whereas, the rights of practitioners of Indian System of Medicine are protected under Section17(3)(b) of the Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970 (Central Act 48 of 1970) ;
And Whereas, as per Section 2(1)(3) of the Said Act, “Indian Medicine : means the system of Indian Medicine commonly known as Ashtang Ayurveda, Siddha or Unani Tibb whether supplemented or not by such modern advances, as the Central Council of Indian Medicine may delcare by notification from time to time ;
And Whereas, the Central Council of Indian Medicine in its Ntoification F.No.28-5/2004-AY (MM), dated the 19th May 2004, has clarified that the ward “Modern Advances” in clause (e) of Section 2(1) of the said Act as advances made in the various branches of modern scientific medicine in all its branches of internal medicine, surgery, gynaechology and obstetrics, anaesthesiology, diagnostic procedures and other technological innovation made from time to time and declare that the courses and curriculam conducted and recognized by the Central Council of Indian Medicine are supplemented with such modern advances ;
And Whereas, the Central Council of Indian Medicines has improved and strengthened the syllabus of Indian Medicine by including subjects with regard to National Programmes like National Malaria Eradication Programmes, Tuberclosis, Leprosy, Family Welfare Programme, Reproductive and Child Health Programme, Immunisation Programme, AIDS, Cancer, etc:”
5. A perusal of the counter filed by the third respondent and the submission made by the learned Special Government Pleader reveals that the petitioner clinic is located just in front of the Government Medical College Hospital, Velore and the said area is not a remote area and the petitioner is taking advantage of the Government order and started to practice allopathic as full time. Therefore, the innocent public got affected.
6. He also relied upon the Judgment reported in 1996 (4)
SCC 332 in the case of Poonam Verma Vs. Ashwin Patel and others, in which the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held that merely because the Anatomy and Physiology of human being is similar, a person who studied one system of medicine could not treat the patient by drugs of another system which he might not have studied. Therefore, the medical practitioners must possess valid license from the statutory authorities. In the absence of any such valid license or otherwise, the enforcing authorities are competent to initiate all appropriate actions.
7. In the case on hand, ad