Dr. Ramdas Laxmanrao Khesar And Ors vs The State Of Mah. And Ors on 29 October, 2015
In the case of Maharashtra State Veterinary Council vs. The
State of Maharashtra (supra), the petitioner- Maharashtra State
Veterinary Council, Nagpur has challenged the appointment of Live
Stock Supervisors made by the respondent Zilla Parishad in
pursuance to the advertisement issued by the Zilla Parishad. In this
::: Uploaded on - 30/10/2015 ::: Downloaded on - 31/10/2015 00:01:01 :::
wp7847.11
-23-
view of the matter, this Court (Nagpur Bench) has held that the
respondents are entitled to recruit the non graduate practitioners at
Veterinary Science for rendering minor veterinary services only as
contemplated by Notification issued under Section 30(b) of the Act on
the post such as Live Stock Supervisor and that non graduate
practitioners of Veterinary Science will not be entitled to hold any
post of Veterinary Physician or Surgeon in the Government or any
institution maintained by local authority or practice veterinary
medicine in the State of Maharashtra. It is further directed that the
respondent State of Maharashtra and Chief Executive Officer, Zilla
Parishad shall ensure that no non graduate veterinary practitioner
employed by them shall be allowed to hold any post of Veterinary
Physician or Surgeon or be allowed to function, except under the
supervision and direction of a registered veterinary practitioner. In
the light of notification issued under Section 30(B) of the Central
Veterinary Act, the Division Bench of this Court (Nagpur Bench) held
that non graduate practitioners at Veterinary Science will not be
entitled to hold any post of Veterinary Physician or Surgeon in the
Government department or any institution. It appears that the
Division Bench of this Court was not required to deal with the
question whether the diploma holders, who were enrolled/registered
in the State Veterinary Council Register, Part I prior to March, 1997,
stood protected under Section 23(1) of the Central Veterinary Act.