Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed alleging that the medical education and grant of degrees etc. in the field of medicine, are not controlled and regulated by the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956. Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970, Homoeopathic Central Council Act, 1973 and Indian Medical Degrees Act, 1916 of late, newspapers have been flooded with advertisements of the institutions which are functioning in violation of the provisions of said Acts and causing incalculable damage to public health. The New Delhi Medical Institute of Electropathy, functioning at H-38, Street No. 9, New Mahabir Nagar, New Delhi is one of such institutions. It claims to be affiliated to NaturoElectro Homoeo Medicines of India (for short 'N.E.H.M.') and authorised to function by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India. Dr. N.K. Awasthy projected as the Electopathy Smarat of India, is the founder of this institution. It grants degree of Bachelor of Electropathy Medicine and Surgery (B.E.M.S) on completion of four years course. Said institution is housed in three rooms and does not even possess the symbolic infrastructure for teaching and training about one thousand students on its roll. A photostat copy of the prospectus of the institution has been placed on the record. It is stated that the Medical College of Alternative Medi-cines at 3, Canal Street, Calcutta, is yet another institution which claims to be having the legal authority to impart education in Alternate systems of medicine and is said to have been recognised by the Department of Health and Family Welfare, Government of West Bengal. It also claims to be accepted by the Indian Medical Council and grants degrees and diplomas. A photostat copy of the advertisement published by it in the Hindustan Times dated 17th July, 1996 has been annexed to the petition. Health and Medicare Institut at 80, Chowringhee Road, Calcutta, another such institution has inserted advertisement in Hindustan Times dated 15th September, 1996 (Annexure 'G') inviting applications for admission to Degree/Diploma/MD/RMP Courses on regular and correspondence basis. These courses are not at all recognised under any of the aforesaid Acts. There are many such unapproved institutions dealing in medical science operating in India. It is stated that the persons acquiring medical qualifications from these unauthorised institutions have been and would be posing serious threat to public health at large. With a view to curb the menace, the petitioner served notices dated 19th September, 1996 on the respondents but of no avail. It is prayed that by issue of writ, direction or order respondents 1 to 9 be commanded to forthwith ban the aforesaid institutions and a probe into their functioning be made. Said respondents be further directed to work out a policy to check such like institutions and the persons ound guilty be prosecuted as per law.

6. In its reply affidavit Medical Council of India, respondent No. 5 has stated that provisions contained in Indian Medical Degrees Act, 1916 and Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 apply only in the field of Allopathic system of medicine. Right to practice in Homoeopathy is regulated by the Homoeopathy Central Council Act, 1973 while in ayurvedic and Unani systems of medicine by Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970. So called Electropathy/Electrohomeopathy system of medicine does not appear to come within the purview of any of the aforesaid Acts. It is alleged that the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India by the letter dated 1st November, 1996 informed respondent No. 5 by giving reference of a decision taken by the Ministry on 19th November, 1993 that Electropathy/Electrohomoeopathy system has not been granted recognition as an independent system of medicine. There is no legislation concerning Electropathy/Electrohomoeopathy syste of medicine in India. It is further stated that respondent No. 5 received complaints in regard to respondent No. 12 imparting certain medical degrees/diplomas, practitioners claiming to be registered with respondent No. 12 and prescribing allopathic medicines. Respondent No. 5, therefore, took up the matter with respondent No.12 and sought clarification from its with regard to its status and authority. Respondent No.12 not only sent nasty replies but gave threat with an action of contempt of Court against respondent No. 5. Respondent No. 12 claims that it has been approved by the Calcutta High Court in Matter No. 546/88 and the Indian Medical Council has accepted it vide CR No. 2419(W) of 1988 of the Calcutta High Court. There is no record available with respondent No. 5 in regard to the said cases nor did it appear in them before the Calcutta High Court. Respondent No. 5 does not have any branch office in West Bengal. The claim of respondent No. 12 about the allged acceptance by respondent No. 5 is misleading and deceptive. It is further stated that respondent No. 5 also received complaints with regard to similar institution by the name of Indian Board of Alternative Medicines which is awarding degrees and diplomas in 'Indo-Allopathic', a medical system which is unheard in Allopathic Medicine System. Respondent No. 5 received an advertisement published by the Indian Institute of Alternative Medicine stating that the degrees/diplomas etc. which are granted by it are recognised by Public Health Training Institute, India and that respondent No. 5 had given permission for the RMP Course conducted by that institute. Respondent No. 5 has not given any such permission and the claim made by the institute is false and misleading.

7. In the reply affidavit of H.D. Rikhadi, Assistant Secretary of the Central Council of Homoeopathy, respondent No. 8 it is, inter alia, stated that neither Electropathy nor alternative medicines are recognised, accepted or officially known systems of medicine.

8. Respondent No. 10 in its counter affidavit has stated that it is affiliated to Nature Electro Homeopathy Medicos of India which is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act for Promotion, Development and Research in Electropathy system of medicine in India. N.K. Awasthi is the Secretary thereof. Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India vide Memo No. V-25017/4/90/R dated 16th May, 1991 appointed an Expert Committee which inter alia comprised of Dr. S.D. Sharma, Additional Director General(M) as Chairman, Dr. N.K. Awasthi as Secretary, Dr. V.T. Augustine, Advisor(M), Dr. D.P. Rastogi, Director, CCRH and Dr. B.N. Dawan, Director, CDRI, as members thereof. Said Committee submitted its report in August 1991 and has found that thousands of doctors are practicing Electropathy/Electrohomoeopathy system of medicine in India by using Electropathic Medicines. Aforesaid report is under consideration of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government o India. It is further stated that the said system has a history of 500 years and it mainly functions as preventive and curative on the principles of "The Human Organisation is entirely composed of two elementary liquids known as Lymph and Blood and Health and Diseases are depending upon such liquids." In response to a Private Member Bill bearing No. 138/90 Sh. Dasai Choudhry, the then Minister for Health and Family Welfare stated that he had authorised NEHM of India, New Delhi for development, promotion and research of Electropathy in India vide DO letter bearing No. 2921/DM(H&F)/9/VIP dated 17th June, 1991. It is not denied that respondent No.10 is functioning at 38, New Mahabir Nagar. However, it is stated that the institute has 120 students of Bachelor of Electropathy Medicine & Surgery which is four year certification course. It is operating in a building having sufficient space for coaching. Respondent No.10 does not claim that the said system of medicine is recognised by he Government of India. There is no law which may prevent further systems of medicine being practised by the people of India.

23. Submission made by S/Sh. V.C. Misra appearing for respondent No. 10 and P.N. Duda for Students Association was that the Ayurveda had been practised for thousands of years by the peoples as an unrecognised medical system and it was only in 1970 that the Govt. of India gave recognition to it by enacting Indian Medicine Central Council Act. Likewise Homoeopathy which was brought to India in 1839 by Dr. Honiberger Germany, was being practised for about 110 years as an unrecognised system before it came to be recognised by the Govt. of India by passing Homoeopathy Central Council Act. The day is not far off when the Govt. would also grant recognition to Electropathy system. According to the learned counsel, there is no legislation whatsoever prohibiting a body or person from conducting courses in Electropathy system and the persons practicing the same. Somewhat identical stand has been taken in the reply affidavits by respondents 11 & 12 who have been conducting course in Alernative systems of medicine. Aforesaid Central Acts of 1956, 1970 & 1973 obviously do not deal with Electropathy or other Alternative systems of medicine. Existence of any other Central or State legislation regulating the said systems of medicine was not brought to our notice by any of the learned counsel appearing in the case. Thus, the submission in regard to there being no legal bar in conducting courses in Electropathy and for that matter any other Alternative systems of medicine and practicing them, is not without substance.