Disposed

K. Velusamy, v. the Registrar

Madras HC11 Jun 2015WP(MD)/13654/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by K. Velusamy seeking registration as a Siddha Practitioner. The Court directed the Medical Council to consider the petitioner's representation on merits within two months.

What did the court decide?

Respondent directed to consider petitioner's representation on merits and pass appropriate orders within two months from date of receipt of order.

K. Velusamy, Vs the Registrar — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 11.06.2015

¶3

CORAM: THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN

¶4

W.P.(MD)No.13654 of 2014

K.Velusamy

... Petitioner

Vs.

The Registrar, Tamil Nadu Siddha Medical Council, Chennai 600 106.

¶9

... Respondent

¶10

PRAYER: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to register the petitioner's name in the Tamil Nadu Siddha Medical Council as Siddha Practitioners of Siddha System of Medicine under the Tamil Nadu Siddha System of Medicines (Development and Registration of Practitioners) Act, 1997, based on his qualification of Diploma of Membership in Siddha (Indigenous) Medicines by considering the representation dated 01.08.2014 within the period stipulated by this Court.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Haja Mohideen For Respondent : Mr.K.P.Krishnadoss, G.A.

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

The petitioner seeks for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to register the petitioner's name in the Tamil Nadu Siddha Medical Council as Siddha Practitioners of Siddha System of Medicine under the Tamil Nadu Siddha System of Medicines (Development and Registration of Practitioners) Act, 1997, based on his qualification of Diploma of Membership in Siddha (Indigenous) Medicines by considering the representation dated 01.08.2014 within the period stipulated by this Court.

¶14

Mr.K.P.Krishnadoss, learned Government Advocate takes

¶15

notice for the respondent. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

¶16

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it would suffice if the representation of the petitioner is disposed of, on merits and in accordance with law, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶17

4.In view of the limited scope of the prayer, the respondent https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 01.08.2014 on merits and in accordance with law and pass

¶18

¶19

appropriate orders within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶20

5.With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

¶21

Sd/-

¶22

Assistant Registrar(CO)

¶23

/True copy/

¶24

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶25

¶26

The Registrar, Tamil Nadu Siddha Medical Council, Chennai 600 106.

¶27

+1cc to MR.A.HAJA MOHIDEEN ADVOCATE IN SR NO.30019

¶28

W.P.(MD)No.13654 of 2014 11.06.2015

¶29

RG.30.06.2015 2P/3C

¶30

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

K. Velusamy, v. the Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K. Velusamy, v. the Registrar

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

G.Sathaiah, Vs the Agicultural Production

R. Suronmani, Vs the Project Director

N.Krishnamoorthy, Vs the Director General

K.Muthu Vs University Grants Commission

Pappathiyammal Pitchai Edl. Vs the Central Board of

M.Murali, S/O K.Muthu, Vs the Secretary