IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 27TH OCTOBER 2011 / 5TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 23703 of 2011(K) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- DR.S.MOHANDAS, ANUPAMA HOSPITAL, 8/741, VENJARAMMOODU,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.S.RAJESH SMT.B.DHANYA RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,HEALTH AND FAMILY WELAFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CENTRAL COUNCIL OF HOMOEOPATHY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,10-COMMUNITY CENTRE, BASANI LOK VASAMTJ VIHAR, NEW DEHLI- 110 057. 3. THE REGISTRAR, TRAVANCORE COCHIN MEDICAL COUNCIL,NEAR GENERAL HOSPITAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.MOHAMMED SHAH R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR R3 BY ADV. SRI.N.RAGHURAJ, SC, TCMC & KNMC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss W.P.(C) NO.23703/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:-TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE BOARD OF GOVERNMENT EXAMINATIONS IN HOMOEOPATHY MEDICINE AND SURGERY. P1(A).TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE UNDER THE TRAVANCORE COCHIN MEDICAL PARISHIONER'S ACT. P2:-TRUE COPY OF THE PUBLICATIONS CAME IN THE LOCAL NEWSPAPERS. P3:-TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE GRAMA PANCHAYATH. P4:-TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE GRAMA PANCHAYATH DATED 28/12/2010. P5:-TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATES ISSUED BY PSYCHIATRIC SOCIAL WORKER. P6:-TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ABSTRACT G.O.NO.1244/88/BHAM DATED 09/5/1988. P7:-TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 30/10/1996. P8:-TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 4/5/2008 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH. P8(A):-TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 4/5/2008 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE REGISTRAR,TCMC. RESPONDANTS'S EXHIBITS NIL:- TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 23703 of 2011 K ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 27th day of October, 2011 J U D G M E N T ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Petitioner is a registered Homoeo Practitioner. In this writ petition, main reliefs sought for are the following:- “(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the first respondent to permit the petitioner to practice in Modern Medicine without any hindrance and to protect the petitioner as per Section 38(1) of the Travancore Cochin Medical Practitioners Act, 1953. (ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondents to grant exemption to the petitioner under Section 38 of the Travancore Cochin Medical Practitioners Act, 1953.” 2. Section 38(1) of the Act, the benefit of which is claimed by the petitioner, reads as under:- W.P.(C) No.23703/2011 : 2 : “38. Persons not registered under this Act, etc., not to practice - No person other than (i) a registered practitioner or (ii) a practitioner whose name is entered in the list of practitioners published under Section 30 or (iii) a practitioner whose name is entered in the list mentioned in Section 25 shall practice or hold himself out, whether directly or by implication, as practising modern medicine, homoeopathic medicine or ayurvedic medicine, siddha medicine or unani tibbi and no person who is not a registered practitioner of any such medicine shall practise any other medicine unless he is also a registered practitioner of that medicine. Provided that the Government may, by notification in the Gazette, direct that this section shall not apply to any person or class or persons or to any specified area in the State where none of the three classes of practitioners mentioned above carries on medical practice.” W.P.(C) No.23703/2011 : 3 : 3. Reading of the proviso to Section 38(1) shows that the benefit of Section 38(1) can be extended only to any person or class or persons or to any specified area in the State, where none of the classes of the practitioners mentioned in Section 38(1) viz., modern medicine, Homoeopathic medicine or ayurvedic medicine etc., are not carrying on medical practice. 4. In this writ petition, there is no material whatsoever to think that this benefit is applicable to the area where the petitioner is practising. In such circumstances, there is no substance in the writ petition. Writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) aks/27/10 // True Copy // P.A. To Judge