IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 25TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 3RD ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 26901 of 2009(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. DR,BEENA R., AGED 39 YEARS, PUTHUMANA, NADUVATHU CHERI, CHAVARA SOUTH POST, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. DR.MAYA M.S.,AGED 37 YEARS, MYDIYIL HOUSE, AATHINADU SOUTH, KATTILKADAVU POST, KARUNAGAPPALLI. BY ADV. SRI.J.JAYAKUMAR SRI.S.JIJI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE STATE MISSION DIRECTOR, NATIONAL RURAL HEALTH MISSION, DIRECTORATE OF HEALTH SERVICE, THIRUVANANTHAPRUAM. 3. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NIRMAN BHAVAN, NEW DELHI-110001. 4. THE CENTRAL COUNCIL OF HOMOEOPATHY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, 10, COMMUNITY CENTRE, BASANT LOK, VASANT VIHAR, NEW DELHI-110057. 5. DIRECTOR OF HOMOEOPATHY, DIRECTORATE OF HOMOEOPATHY, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.M.AJAY,SC,NATIONAL RURAL HEALTH MIS FOR R2 SRI.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN,ASST.SOLICITOR FOR R3 GP ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).26901/2009 -------------------- Dated this the 25th day of September, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioners have acquired Diploma in Homeopathic Medicines and Surgery conducted by the Board of Examinations in Homeopathy, Government of Kerala. This is evidenced by Exts.P1 and P2. Petitioners are registered under the Travancore Cochin Medical Practitioners Act, 1953, as evidenced by Exts.P3 and P4. The qualifications acquired by the petitioners are included in the 2nd schedule of the Homeopathic Central Council Act, 1973 and are therefore, recognized diplomas. 2. The State Mission Director of the National Rural Health Mission issued Ext.P5 notification inviting Homoeo and Ayurvedic Medical Graduates for appointment in different districts under the NRHM, on contract basis. It seems that initially certain diploma holders were also included in the rank list that was prepared, but later, on a complaint that applications were invited from Homeo and Ayurvedic Medical graduates and not from diploma holders, a verification was done and non graduates were excluded from the list. It seems W.P.(C).26901/2009 2 that the petitioners also were therefore, excluded from the list. Petitioners contend that this process of verification was undertaken with reference to Ext.P8 Government Order dated 22.4.1995 wherein considering the recommendations of the Central Council of Homeopathy, Government of Kerala had ordered that medical qualifications in Homeopathy, acquired after undergoing a course of four years' duration, awarded prior to the enforcement of Homeopathy (Diploma Course) Regulations 1983, and included in the 2nd schedule of the Homeopathic Central Council Act, will be treated as equivalent to the degree in Homeopathy. Petitioners contend that Ext.P8 is illegal inasmuch as the Government has declared only such qualifications acquired prior to the enforcement of the 1983 Regulations as equivalent to a Degree. Petitioners contend that similar qualifications acquired even after 1983, should be treated as equivalent to the same. Hence the challenge against Ext.P8 on the ground that it results in discrimination among similarly situated persons. There is also a prayer for a direction to the NRHM to consequently consider the petitioners also, as possessing qualification equivalent to a Degree in Homeopathy and include them in the list of Homeopathic Medical graduates W.P.(C).26901/2009 3 for appointment to different posts under the NRHM. 3. I heard learned counsel for the petitioners Mr.Jayakumar, learned counsel for the NRHM Mr.M.Ajay and learned Government Pleader. 4. The challenge against Ext.P8 is misconceived, in my view. It is in fact by Ext.P8 order, Government has declared certain non degree qualifications as equivalent to that of a Degree in Homeopathy, provided such qualifications were acquired prior to the enforcement of the Central Regulations, 1983. Government had passed this order accepting the recommendations of the Central Council of Homeopathy. The order has not resulted in any unreasonable classification among similarly situated persons. If the petitioners also pray for a similar treatment, it is upto them to see that the Central Council of Homeopathy makes a similar recommendation. Government of Kerala had only accepted the recommendations of the Central Council. The order only grants a benefit to a certain class of people who otherwise may not have been able to claim that their qualification should be treated as equivalent to a Degree in Homeopathy. W.P.(C).26901/2009 4 5. Even otherwise the NRHM is entitled to stipulate that they need only graduates in Homeopathy and Ayurveda in different posts. They are always entitled to insist that persons with qualifications which might be treated as equivalent by the Government or the PSC are not acceptable and that only graduates be considered for appointment. The challenge against Ext.P8 is therefore, misconceived in the context of considering the prayer for a direction to the NRHM to consider the petitioners also. If the NRHM insists on degree holders, then they are entitled to see that only degree holders should be appointed to posts forming part of the National Rural Health Mission. For all these reasons, I find no merit in the writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs