Dismissed

P.Anoop Vaidyan v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC20 Jun 2017WP(C)/9805/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a Sidha practitioner without qualifications under the Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970, sought exemption from registration under the Travancore Cochin Medical Practitioners Act. The Court held the exemption provision repugnant to the Central Act and dismissed the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Direction to authorities to consider and pass orders on the application for exemption from registration was not granted.

P.Anoop Vaidyan Vs the State of Kerala — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE 2017/30TH JYAISHTA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 9805 of 2017 (A)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

P. ANOOP VAIDYAN, AGED 37 YEARS, S/O. PEETHAMBARAN, CHINTHALAYAM, CHANDRAMANGALOM, ANAD P.O., NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.M.R.SARIN.

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶11

2. THE COUNCIL OF INDIGENOUS MEDICINE, REPRESENTED BY THE REGISTRAR, OFFICE OF THE MEDICAL COUNCIL, RED CROSS ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶12

3. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶13

4. THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER, KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶14

5. THE DRUG CONTROLLER, OFFICE OF THE DRUG CONTROLLER, RED CROSS ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶15

BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.S. KANNAN.

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-06-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

rs.

¶18

WP(C).No. 9805 of 2017 (A)

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-

¶21

EXHIBIT P1- THE TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION ISSUED BY CHAIRMAN OF THE NAATTUCHIKILSA RESEARCH FOUNDATION PERAYAM P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶22

EXHIBIT P2- TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT ON 06/03/2017.

¶23

EXHIBIT P3- TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C)NO.8297/2009 ON THE FILE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

¶24

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

rs.

P.B. SURESH KUMAR, J.

¶29

W.P.(C) No.9805 of 2017

¶30

Dated this the 20^th day of June, 2017

¶31

JUDGMENT

¶32

The petitioner is a practitioner of Sidha System of Medicine. He does not have any recognised qualification in Sidha System of Medicine provided for under the Indian Medicine Central Council Act. He is, therefore, not entitled to registration as a medical practitioner under the Travancore Cochin Medical Practitioners Act ('the Act'). The petitioner, therefore, preferred an application for exemption from the requirement of registration provided under the Act invoking the first proviso to Section 38 of the Act. Ext.P2 is the application preferred by the petitioner before the first respondent for this purpose. The limited prayer made by the learned counsel for

¶33

W.P.(C) No.9805 of 2017

¶34

-2-

¶35

the petitioner, when this matter was taken up for admission, is for a direction to the authorities under the Act to consider and pass orders on Ext.P2 application.

¶36

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as

¶37

also the learned Government Pleader.

¶38

The first proviso to Section 38 of the Act is repugnant to the provisions contained in the Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970. As such, after the Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970, one cannot claim exemption from the requirement of registration provided for under the first proviso to Section 38 of the Act. In the said view of the matter, the prayer sought in the writ petition cannot be granted and the writ petition is accordingly, dismissed.

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

P.B. SURESH KUMAR

¶41

JUDGE

¶42

bpr

P.Anoop Vaidyan v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Anoop Vaidyan v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kunhimuhammed Vs State of Kerala

Basheer E Vs the Land Tribunal

Prakashan P.K. Vs Child Welfare Committee (Cwc)

R. Ananthapadmanaban Vs Bank of India

Padmanaban Vs the Sub Registrar, Ponnani

B.Radha Vs State of Kerala