IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH JUNE 2008 / 21ST JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 24288 of 2005(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ THE INSTITUTION OF HOMEOPATHS KERALA REP. BY THE PRESIDENT DR.E.G.SATHEESH, S/O.LATE E.G.GOVINDAN NAMBOOTHIRI, AGED 33 YEARS, KARUVELIL ILLOM, THRIKKARIYOOR P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JOBY JACOB PULICKEKUDY SRI.ANIL GEORGE SRI.PAUL MATHEW (PERUMPILLIL) RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE TRAVANCORE- COCHIN MEDICAL COUNCIL, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, RED CROSS ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, NIRMAN BHAVAN, NEW DELHI. 4. ELDO P.JOHN, EBANEZAR RESEARCH CENTRE AND HOSPITAL, MANIYATTU TOWERS, NEDUNGAPRA P.O., KURUPPAMPADY (VIA), ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.E.S.MUHAMMED KABIR, ADD.CGSC FOR R3 SRI.GOVIND K.BHARATHAN (SR.) FOR R4 SRI.MANU MOHAN FOR R4 SRI.N.RAGHURAJ, SC, TCMC & KNMC FOR R2 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. SANTHOSH SRI. P. PARAMESWARAN NAIR, ASST. S.G. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: W.P.C.NO. 24288/2005. --------------------------------------------------------------------- EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DT. 25-11-2003. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION. [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 24288 of 2005 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 11th June, 2008. J U D G M E N T Petitioner herein is an association of homeopathic medical practitioners of Kerala, Kothamangalam Branch. In this writ petition, they are challenging the act of the 4th respondent in practising homeopathy without a valid registration or even recognised qualification. The allegation is that the 4th respondent is practicing homeopathy in the name and style of “Electropathy/Electro Homeopathy” claiming that the same is an approved and recognised system of medicine. The petitioner lodged a complaint before the Circle Inspector of Police, Kuruppampady, against this illegal action of the 4th respondent. The petitioner submits that although the 4th respondent filed W.P(C) No. 8772/05 against the alleged police harassment, the same was dismissed as withdrawn. Therefore, the petitioner sent Ext. P2 representation to respondents 2 and 3 to take legal action against the 4th respondent. Because of the failure of respondents 2 and 3 to take action on Ext. P2, this writ petition has been filed. 2. The 1st respondent has filed a counter affidavit in which it is stated thus: “2. It is humbly submitted that it is averred that the 4th respondent is practicing medicine in the name and style of 'Electropathy/Electro Homeopathy' as alternative medicine. Such practice of medicine is illegal. The statutes governing the practice of medicine in the State are the IMC Act, 1956, the IMCC Act 1970, the HCC Act, 1973 and the Dentists Act, 1948. All Central Acts applicable to the whole country and the TCMP Act, 1953 applicable to the State only. None of the above mentioned Acts recognizes any qualification in any Alternative Medicine, nor provides for practice of such medicines. All these statutes prohibit practice of the respective system of medicine without registration under the concerned Act. No person is entitled to practice medicine without having recognized qualification and registration under the concerned Act. Hence the alleged medical practice by the 4th respondent is illegal as he does not possess any statutorily recognized qualification or registration under any law entitling W.P.C. No. 24288/2005 -: 2 :- him to practice medicine. 3. It is submitted that in the case Vanchiyoor Madhom v. State of Kerala & Others, [2003(1) KLT 520] after considering similar petitions, a Division Bench of this Honourable High Court has categorically held as follows: “From the facts it is clear that under the 1953 act only those persons who have acquired the qualification from the institutions included in the schedule are entitled to practise medicine and claim registration.” 4. Ext. P1 order issued by the third respondent is absolutely legal and unassainable. It reiterates the legal position as it stands at present and shows that the alleged medical practice by the 4th respondent absolutely illegal. Ext. P2 cannot be acted upon at present due to the interim order of the Honouorable High Court in W.P(C) No.8772/2005. The 2nd respondent has already instructed its Council to contest W.P(C) No. 8772 of 2005, so as to establish that the medical practice by the 4th respondent in this Writ Petition is illegal and liable to be stopped forthwith. 5. The 4th respondent has not been given registration by the 2nd respondent to practice any stem of medicine and therefore his alleged practice is illegal. The 4th respondent does not possess any recognized qualification or registration under any of the Acts mentioned in para 1 above. Hence he is not eligible or entitled to practice any system of medicine in the State. His qualification can be considered at the most as academic, which does not entitle the holder thereof to any medical practice. The respondent is sincerely and vehemently contesting the W.P(C) No. 8772/05 to get it dismissed so as to put an end to the illegal medical practice by the 4th respondent. Hence it is humbly prayed that this Honourable Court my be pleased to hold that the 4th respondent's medical practice is illegal and to direct him to stop such practice forthwith.” Learned counsel for the 2nd respondent would submit that the question as to whether Electropathy/Electro Homeopathy is a recognised branch of medicine in Homeopathy, was considered by the Government of India and it has been held that Electropathy and Electro Homeopathy are not being recognised as part of any branch of medicine. In view of the counter affidavit of the 1st respondent as also the statement of the 2nd respondent, it is quite clear that the 4th respondent cannot validly practice medicine in any branch of W.P.C. No. 24288/2005 -: 3 :- medicine much less any branch of Homeopathy, even if it is in “Electropathy/Electro Homeopathy”. That being so, the 1st respondent is bound to take appropriate action in the matter through its officers. Accordingly, I direct the 1st respondent to see that the 4th respondent does not practice medicine in any branch of medicine without a valid registration from the appropriate medical Council, by taking appropriate action against the 4th respondent in the matter, if necessary, by force. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/