IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 26TH MARCH 2010 / 5TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 27525 of 2009(I) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- DR.M.P.PRAKASAN, "DIVYA", KARAPARAMBA P.O., KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. MR.T.G.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, DEPARTMENT OF INDIAN SYSTEMS OF MEDICINE AND HOMOEOPATHY, IRCS BUILDING, NEW DELHI. 2. THE CENTRAL COUNCIL OF HOMOEOPATHY, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, NO.61-65, 5TH AND 6TH FLOORS INSTITUTIONAL AREA, OPP: 'D'BLOCK, JANAKPURI, NEW DELHI 110 058. 3. THE UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O. R1 BY ADVS. MR.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN,ASST.SOLICITOR R3 BY MR.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, CALICUT UTY. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C0 NO.27525/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DTD. 25.4.07. P2:- COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DTD. 26.4.2000. P2(A):- COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT DT. 1.10.2000. P3:- COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 5.7.01. P4:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OP. 1751/2003 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. P5:- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DTD. 9.10.03. P6:- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION SENT BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PRINCIPAL MEDICAL COLLEGE DTD. 5.9.03. P7:- COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN WPC. 39985/03 DTD. 18.12.04. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE tss T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.27525 of 2009-I - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 26th day of March, 2010. JUDGMENT The petitioner’s claim to continue in the Central Council of Homoeopathy is the subject matter for determination in this writ petition. The facts narrated in the writ petition show the following: The petitioner was elected as a representative of the University in the Central Council of Homoeopathy (CCH for short) in the year 2000. Ext.P2(A) is the notification including him as a Member of the Central Council. The period to hold office is five years from the date of his election or nomination as the case may be, or until his successor shall have been duly elected or nominated, whichever is longer. He was nominated as a Dean of the Faculty with effect from 26.6.2001 by the Chancellor as per Ext.P3. He can hold office as such for a period of two years and accordingly he was entitled to continue till 25.6.2003. He had filed an earlier writ petition, viz. O.P.No.1751/2003 wherein the challenge was against the communication issued by the second respondent sitting that his membership in the Central Council will cease to exist with effect from 19.11.2002 due to non existence of faculty of Homoeopathy in the University of Calicut. The writ wpc 27525/2009 2 petition was allowed as per Ext.P4 judgment, declaring his right to continue. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that in the light of the original term, he was entitled to continue till 1.10.2005. But when certain objections arose, he filed another writ petition, viz. W.P.(C) No.39985/2003 wherein as per Ext.P7 interim order, the petitioner was permitted to continue as Member of the CCH. Thereafter, he was continuing. 3. By Ext.P1, the petitioner was elected as member of the Faculty of the University again, with effect from 25.4.2007 for a period of three years. According to the petitioner, he can continue as a member of the Faculty till that time and he can also continue in the CCH till that time or till a successor is elected. 4. W.P.(C) No.39985/2003 was disposed of as infructuous. Alleging that thereafter the second respondent is not inviting the petitioner for meetings, this writ petition has been filed. 5. The stand taken by the second respondent in the counter affidavit is that going by sub-section (4) of Section 7 of the Homoeopathy Central Council Act, he will cease to be in office if he is not a member of the faculty of the department. Herein, he was elected as a member of the CCH by Ext.P2 on 26.4.2000. He was again elected as a faculty member on 5.7.2001 for a period of two years and his term expired on 4.7.2003. He wpc 27525/2009 3 was renominated to the faculty on 19.9.2003 for a period of three years and that term expired on 18.9.2006 and again re-nominated on 25.4.2007 and is continuing as such. It is pointed out that when he ceased to be a member of the faculty, he is not entitled to continue in the Central Council. A decision of a Division Bench of this Court in John v. Joint Registrar of Co-op. Societies (1996 (1) KLT 479) is relied upon. It is stated that he was continuing only in the light of the interim order passed by this Court, but the said writ petition was dismissed as infructuous. 6. Even going by the provisions of sub-section (4) of Section 7 of the Act which provides for a term of the member, if he is ceases to be a member of the faculty, he will be deemed to have vacated the office. Herein, evidently he ceased to be a member of the faculty in the year 2006 and his term expired on 18.9.2006. He was again renominated only on 25.4.2007. Therefore, once he has ceased to be in office, unless there is a re-election to the Central Council there cannot be a continuance therein. A similar question was considered by a Division Bench of this Court in John's case (1996 (1) KLT 479). The issue arose under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. The interpretation of Rules 44A and 46(f) of the Kerala Co- operative Societies Act arose for consideration therein. Therein, going by wpc 27525/2009 4 Rule 44A only a member of the committee of a primary society can represent it in the Central Society. It was held that the moment he ceases to be a member of the Committee of primary society, he will cease to be a delegate to the Central Society. It was also held that in light of Rule 46(f), “a member of the committee of the Central Society must cease to hold that office the moment he ceases to be member of the committee of the primary society.” The situation herein is identical. Once the petitioner has ceased to be a member of the faculty, going by sub-section (4) of Section 7 of the Act, he will have to vacate his office in the Central Council. The contention taken by the petitioner that he can continue till a successor is duly elected or nominated, cannot be accepted. 7. The petitioner's continuance in the Central Council depends upon his continuance in the faculty of Homoeopathy. Since there is a cessation of office to the said faculty, he cannot continue as a member of the Central Council. Therefore, the writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/