Madras High Court
P.S.Murugesa Pandiyan vs The Director General Police on 15 March, 2019
Author: G.K.Ilanthiraiyan
Bench: G.K.Ilanthiraiyan
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 15.03.2019
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
W.P.Nos.10920 & 10921 of 2017
and W.M.P.Nos.11883 & 11884 of 2017
W.P.No. 10920 of 2017 :-
1. P.S.Murugesa Pandiyan
2. S.Selvaraj
3. T.Subbiah
4. K.Malaichamy
5. A.Balachandran
6. R.Natarajan
7. M.D.Daisy
8. G.S.Jothi Rani
9. R.K.Karunakaran
10. M.S.K.Thangavel
11. L.R.Balasubramani
12. V.Manoharan
13. T.Kalimuthu
14. R.Balamurugan
15. T.Palaniappan
16. A.Alexander
17. V.Murugappa
18. A.Arunagiri
19. Dr.V.Balu
20. Dr.S.Kulanthaivelu
21. Dr.M.Alagarsamy ... Petitioners
Vs.
1.The Director General Police,
Kamarajar Salai,
Mylapore,
Chennai - 600 004.
http://www.judis.nic.in
2
2.The Superintendent of Police,
Madurai, Madurai District.
3. The Superintendent of Police,
Dindigul, Dindigul District.
4. The Superintendent of Police,
Karur, Karur District.
5. The Superintendent of Police,
Namakkal, Namakkal District.
6. The Superintendent of Police,
Virudhunagar,
Virudhunagar District. ...Respondents
W.P.No. 10921 of 2017 :-
1. P.Vimalan
2. S.Rajkumar
3. J.Austin Jeba
4. V.Jaganathan
5. K.Sivakumar
6. P.Ganesan
7. N.Kalaiappan
8. M.Purushothaman
9. K.Kathiravan
10. K.Selvam
11. L.R.Chinnadurai
12. K.Saravanan
13. P.Murugambal ... Petitioners
Vs.
1.The Director General Police,
Kamarajar Salai,
Mylapore,
Chennai - 600 004.
http://www.judis.nic.in
3
2.The Superintendent of Police,
Tiruppur, Tiruppur District.
3. The Superintendent of Police,
Dindigul, Dindigul District.
4. The Superintendent of Police,
Karur, Karur District.
5. The Superintendent of Police,
Namakkal, Namakkal District.
6. The Superintendent of Police,
Tuticorin,
Tuticorin District.
7. The Superintendent of Police,
Ramanathapuram,
Ramanathapuram District. ...Respondents
Common Prayer : Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to forbear the respondents from in
any way interfering with the petitioner's right to practice and prescribe
alternative medicines strictly in conformity with the Certificate of Community
Medical Services, to carryon lawful occupation under Article 19 (1)(g) of the
Constitution of India by considering their representation dated 30.11.2016
and 10.04.2017, respectively, in view of the law declared in Dr.Mukhtiar Chand
Case [1998(7) SCC 579].
For Petitioners
in both petitions : Mr.N.Manokaran
For Respondents
in both petitions : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz
Additional Public Prosecutor
http://www.judis.nic.in
4
COMMON ORDER
These Writ Petitions have been filed for a Writ of Mandamus to forbear the respondents from in any way interfering with the petitioners' right to practice and prescribe alternative medicines strictly in conformity with the Certificate of Community Medical Services, to carryon lawful occupation under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India by considering their representation dated 30.11.2016 and 10.04.2017, respectively.
2. It is the case of the petitioners in both the petitions that the petitioners are practitioners of alternative medicines like Acupuncture, Electropathy, Hypnotherapy, Magneto therapy, Yoga etc. They have undergone Community Medical Service Certificate Course (CMS) and obtained a Diploma in CMS. However, the respondents are labelling the petitioners as unqualified and they are threatening legal action, thereby affecting the rights of the petitioner to do their profession in their respective fields. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the petitioners have stated that they will not go to the extent of causing harm to the life of their customers.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents. http://www.judis.nic.in 5
4. In the light of the said assurance given in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petitions, both the writ petitions are disposed of, directing the respondents to permit the petitioners to practice in their respective field alone. So long as the petitioners are practicing in their respective mode of medicine, the respondents and their police officials are restrained from initiating any action against them. However, it is open to the respondents or their officials to verify and find out whether the petitioners are practicing in other fields, viz., Ayurveda, Siddha, Unani, Allopathy etc., and if the petitioners are practicing in such fields, it is open to the police officials to initiate action against such of the petitioners in accordance with law. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
15.03.2019
Internet : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Speaking / Non Speaking order
rts
To
1.The Director General Police,
Kamarajar Salai,
Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004.
2.The Superintendent of Police,
Madurai, Madurai District.
http://www.judis.nic.in
6
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
rts
3. The Superintendent of Police,
Dindigul, Dindigul District.
4. The Superintendent of Police,
Karur, Karur District.
5. The Superintendent of Police,
Namakkal, Namakkal District.
6. The Superintendent of Police,
Virudhunagar,
Virudhunagar District.
7. The Superintendent of Police,
Tiruppur, Tiruppur District.
8. The Superintendent of Police,
Tuticorin,
Tuticorin District.
9. The Superintendent of Police,
Ramanathapuram,
Ramanathapuram District.
10.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
W.P.Nos.10920 & 10921 of 2017
and W.M.P.Nos.11883 & 11884 of 2017
15.03.2019
http://www.judis.nic.in