GPN-J-332-ARHCB-8_94-13,10,500-ALA4. SPL.H.C.A.S.C.D. 79e. FARAD FARAD FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. CONTINUATION SHEET NO. CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE. APPELLATE SIDE. APPELLATE SIDE. WRIT PETITION NO. 3982 OF 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- ---------------- Office Notes, Office Memorada Court‘s or Judge‘s orders or directions and Orders. Registrar‘s orders. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Shri N.V.Gavankar with Shri Arfan Saif for the petitioner. Shri S.R. Nargolkar AGp for State CORAM; CORAM; CORAM; V.G. PALSHIKAR & V.G. PALSHIKAR & V.G. PALSHIKAR & SMT. SMT. SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, JJ. NISHITA MHATRE, JJ. NISHITA MHATRE, JJ. DTAED; DTAED; DTAED; 25TH JANUARY, 2005 25TH JANUARY, 2005 25TH JANUARY, 2005. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. By this petition, the petitioner has impugned the order of 15-9-2003 by which the request of the petitioner to practice in Aurveda medicine was rejected. The reason for rejecting it was inadequate knowledge and experience. 2. Taking into consideration the fact that such practitioners seeking recourse to section 37 of the Act are endangering life of people, who may advertantly or inadvertantly go to them because they are allowed to practice. A medical practitioner has to deal with life of human beings. It cannot therefore be said that the rejection of the permission to practice on the ground of inadequacy of knowledge and experience is a perverse finding. We therefore see no reason to interfere. The petition is accordingly dismissed. *****